Since you had previously been made aware of Deuteronomy 22:25-27 you know that it is an utter falsehood to write that “There is no penalty for rape itself in the OT.”
You will note that I provided the URL to Atheism, the Bible, Rape and EvilBible.com which discusses the issue at length.
Also, within that series, I dissected all of the Deuteronomy 22 texts at this post.
Therein, I explain that the Hebrew “taphas” refers to catching, handling, taking hold, grasping, etc. and “shakab” refers to laying down. There is actually no reason to think that the woman was raped as in this scenario both consented and so restitution is made and a shotgun wedding ensues.
Well, “VIOLATE” is certain an interesting and translation of ′amah but even granting the inflammatory translation—and I realize that this is very difficult cultural context of we moderners to understand—unmarried loss of virginity was considered a violation or cultural norms.
The various scenarios that Deuteronomy 22 are very clear (if you have not been told to read “rape” into all of them) in this case she willingly engages him when he makes his advances and so she has to marry him and he makes restitution to the family which he has otherwise shamed.
Read 2 Sam 12:8, where God doesn't mind if someone takes someone else's wife; he gave David Saul's wives as if they were transferable property.
Read what God ordered done (2 Sam 12:11) with David's wives as punishment for his manner of acting (not because he took someone else's wife) and then tell me that it refers to catching, handling, taking hold, grasping.
What do you think people do with other people's wives? Hold them, play catch with them? You are desperately trying to rationalize and justify primitive biblical condoning of rape.
The God of the OT treats women as commodity to be exchanged for damages done. Thank (some other) God, we have evolved from that level of OT sponsored 'morality.'