Aibu to think rape is not merely about power and sometimes is just about sex?

But the motivation of the perpetrator is often (usually) not power, but acquiring the sexual satisfaction they desire, without regard for the person they acquire it from

I'm no expert but I'm not sure about this. I think the power over the victim is part of all forms of rape, maybe in some (stranger rape where it's intrinsic) more than others but always there.

Sometimes it's just a woman's going along with it because she'll not have a miserable husband for a week

If she hasn't given consent and is ostensibly going along with it for this reason then the husband is abusing the power he has over her - the power to pressure her to ensure he's not "miserable", the power to persist and the power to get what he wants without any respect for her autonomy.

Rape is fundamentally an act of power, I'll agree with that, as without the power to rape, you cannot rape.

But the motivation of the perpetrator is often (usually) not power, but acquiring the sexual satisfaction they desire, without regard for the person they acquire it from.

They want sexual satisfaction via sex, and have the entitlement and misogyny to think that acceptable, so they use power to acquire the sexual satisfaction that is their end goal.

This is different to rapists who rape with the end goal of acquiring sexual satisfaction from the degradation of another person, and from having power over another person, not from the sex act itself.

In the latter case, the sex act is a means to an end (getting off on power and/or degradation,) and in the former the power/entitlement is the means to an end (getting off via a sex act.)

Rape springs naturally from the underlying (even subliminal sometimes) widespread belief by societies, cultures, religions etc. that woman is "the lesser". A bit inferior, a little less human. Dehumanise someone and anything becomes possible. Dehumanise a whole sex (I refuse to use the word gender) and rape is just another way of exerting dominance.

Meaningless semantics is used to dismiss lots of feminists arguments.

A lot of things are used to dismiss feminist arguments. That has no bearing on whether this particular point is meaningless semantics.

The point is that you cannot uncouple power from rape. It is fundamentally an act of power. It can be about both sex and power, or just power, but it is never just a sexual act and encouraging the belief that it can be is dangerous.

To say rape is about "sex" you need to have a fucking dismal view of what sex actually is.

Sex is not a man forcing his penis into an unwilling woman's vagina.
Sex is not a man masturbating himself inside a vagina while the owner of that vagina lies there limply, disempowered, being violated.

Sex is a mutual act between two people with enthusiastic consent.

Rape is a man violating a woman's body with his genitals, it is not "sex".

With regard to teaching men about consent ... doing so will not prevent them from raping.
What we need to teach men is to ask explicitly, and wait for a yes. If we can establish this as the normal, the rapists won't be able to hide behind "Oh, but I thought she wanted it".
That might, just might, result in more convictions, and in women being better able to get away from rapists they are in relationships with.

If we want to reduce the number of rapists ... we'd completely change everything about society.

Make boys read books by women and about women's lives in school instead of books by long-dead men.
Cut off boys' access to porn completely.
Perhaps have obligatory lessons in empathy, with a focus on empathy with women.

In short, teach boys that women are human and prevent them from learning the exact opposite from porn.

The problem is not that men cannot recognize a soft no when they see one. They are very well able to do so in all contexts.
The problem is that they don't see women as truly human.

I think all this "ooh you can't say all rape is about power" is meaningless semantics. As DJ says power is inherent in the act of rape.

Entitlement is an expression of power. The powerless feel a sense of injustice. Emotionally immature men lash out at a substitute instead of the person they are angry at, and thats how anger rapes happen.

If the victim had power, they wouldnt be raped.

Personally I think describing all rape as being about power, is rather like saying all child abusers are pedophiles.
It's untrue, and it frames the issue in a very starkly black and white way, which can make people disbelieve victims' disclosures, and even victims disbelieve themselves.
There are multiple reasons why people abuse - power is what makes it possible, yes, but it is often not a motivating factor.

YANBU.
Sometimes rape is about power and sadism. And the power is the focus, not the sexual act - they find the power/sadism itself to be sexually arousing. Hurting someone by violating them and having power over them is what gets them off, sexually.

Sometimes rape is about entitlement and sex. About a man thinking they shouldn't have to masturbate, because they are entitled to actual sex and shouldn't have to have the 'second best' of masturbation. There's an element of power (because entitlement and power are linked,) yes, but their focus is the sex act, not the power they use to force that sex act.

YY DJ.

If two people make the opposite choice and one forcibly gets their way, then they abused power to do that.

If one person wants to stop halfway through the other can choose to finish alone.

That is still about power. Anyone who ignores their partner's sovereign right to consent to sex is exerting power. It's entitlement, and entitlement only comes with power.

Some rape is mostly about power, some is more about gratifying the sexual urge of the rapist. But they have still ignored the feelings of another human being because they feel their desire is more important, without any concern for their psychological and often physical pain and suffering. That is power. Plenty of rapes are about both power and sex but rape is always an act of dominance.

Some rape is about sex and not about power and this is where understanding consent comes into play. When a couple are getting into the mood and sex is either about to happen or is already happening and the women decides she doesn't want to go ahead or continue and the man ignores her and finishes. This could be in a marriage, fwb situation or during dating / ons. The man is ignoring their partners wishes to fulfil their sexual needs.

I think that many rapists conflate power with force. They don't use physical force, so it wasn't an abuse of power, therefore couldn't have been rape.

If they want sex, and have the power/influence to access it then it's OK. They don't need consent, they just need the authority (channel Carter from South Park). A woman is beneath them, and therefore they have the power/right etc. BUt if they're so blind to the privilege they have that they refuse to admit to having that kind of power/control, then they never have to admit that they abused it, therefore they didn't rape.

It's a twisted form of logic which denies the truth that men have many forms of power over women, and pretends that they are equals and it was an act of equal consent.

The way to teach against it is to a) insist that consent is needed, because b) women are just as much people as men are.

Sadly, many men just think that because it was fun for them, it was fun for the woman as well.

I understand the point you are making OP in that the men themselves might not think its about power, but by choosing to do it they are exerting power. So even if their motivation was sexual, the act itself is an act of power and assertion. Power which the victim doesn't have but they do.

Yes I agree bastardbernie well put

The process reminds me of the frustration of a child denied a packet of sweets, followed by disbelief, a sulk, wheedling and an epic tantrum. Its one good reason to teach small children delayed gratification and self soothing.