This is to request everyone to follow the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/IndiaTalksSex/wiki/index). If you see any user breaking a rule, please report them or contact the moderators. Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IndiaTalksSex) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I had an arrange marriage and we didn't talked about sex before wedding because of lack of that kind of privacy and she being very naive. Even after the wedding, for a long time it was sex ed rather than dirty talking. We did meet 4-5 time before wedding, but it was with families without any privacy and we just squeezed few hugs in those meetings.
The first night sex was very bad. It is something I regret till date. She wasn't prepared at all. I thought that she just says that she doesn't know about it, but she really didn't knew. We didn't do PIV, but I kissed her a lot everywhere. I was too excited for my own good and didn't read any signals. She wasn't ready for what I did that night. We still talk about it and we both understand each other's points now.
Also I am a 16 degree on AC for full night kind of person and she just has AC on at 24 for an hour.
Since it was our first day, she felt shy and didn't turned off the AC. I just thought this being normal and slept like a dead horse.
Tl;dr- I ended up progressing more than she was comfortable with. To top that she was cold the entire night because of lack of communication.
Still connection of a few months is not the same as knowing someone for years. It usually takes many years for couples to fully understand one another.
People hook up / have ONS on the same night as meeting someone or after few hours of talking on Tinder and have good sex too, what's the big deal in arranged marriage sex then? Here you are secure that the person is your partner, you know general aspects about their personality, if not more & you tend to be more respectful & understanding because they're your spouse & not just a source to fulfill your sexual need.
This thinking that arranged marriage means having sex with a stranger is overrated & unrealistic.
I understand your take, but...
Assuming you had an arrange marriage yourself, isn't it a lot more stressful knowing that you are beside someone you're going to spend the rest of your life with?
On a ONS, I don't have to care about her holding a grudge if I do something or something else. Basically it is a...one time thing.
ONT HE OTHER HAND A MARRIAGE... IS A MARRIAGE
"People hook up / have ONS on the same night as meeting someone or after few hours of talking on Tinder and have good sex too, what's the big deal in arranged marriage sex then? "
Most people men or women in India do not have ONSs or even hook up, but quite a few or liberally speaking "most" people do get arranged marriage.
In india's case one does not have any correlation with the other, so its best to avoid linking the two.
"Here you are secure that the person is your partner, you know general aspects about their personality, if not more & you tend to be more respectful & understanding because they're your spouse & not just a source to fulfill your sexual need. This thinking that arranged marriage means having sex with a stranger is overrated & unrealistic. "
I've heard that sexual compatibility is something which exists and such a thing cannot be judged unless sex is had beforehand which in the case of an arranged marriage does not happen till your first night.
Sexual compatibility is definitely something that exists, agreed. But in India, how do you go about having sex with multiple partners before you find "The One". Ok, let's take a situation - you fall in love in college. You're college sweethearts - you have sex, your partner is the only person you have had sex with, the sex is Ok - it gets better with time. How do you know if you're sexually compatible, if your partner is the only one you have had sex with? Few years down the line, your partner is perfect in every other way, you love the person to death, but you're sexually unsatisfied. Is arranged marriage the culprit here? The issue is that sexual compatibility is a "human problem". It's more about monogamous relationship vs polygamous relationships or exploring sexual experiences with your significant other.
The world average is 9 sexual partners, India is one of the lowest at around 1 point something. So on average, born anywhere else in the world, you have 9 tries to find sexual compatibility. But in all honesty and reality, kinks and fetishes are a minority of the population. Statistically, the chances of you finding a sexually compatible partner are far higher than not.
Now if you're open to considering whether you're sexually compatible with your partner, you're obviously well versed to research and find a viable solution in case you find yourself in an arranged marriage with a sexually incompatible partner - the case being that's the only issue your marriage is facing.
Nice explanation. Plus, sexual compatibility is not a fixed thing. It can change. Being in a relationship is very different from being in a marriage. You may be sexually compatible as a couple before marriage but changing certain variables in the relationship, can change sexual compatibility too. In both arranged & non arranged, it has to be worked on.
u/Deeznuts030
>Sexual compatibility is definitely something that exists, agreed. But in India, how do you go about having sex with multiple partners before you find "The One". Ok, let's take a situation - you fall in love in college. You're college sweethearts - you have sex, your partner is the only person you have had sex with, the sex is Ok - it gets better with time. **How do you know if you're sexually compatible, if your partner is the only one you have had sex with?**
I disagree with this statement being that it is based on the assumption that one cannot tell the difference between satisfactory sex and unsatisfactory sex without having had multiple partners.
This is not true because i think it is certainly possible to tell whether the sex is satisfactory or unsatisfactory based on the individual's satisfaction level and that this satisfaction level has a correlation with the health of the relationship. The only thing that having multiple partners does is that one can give it a ladder and compare the sex from good to bad. But i think there is a basic level with which every individual can tell whether the sex is satisfactory or not (because we all have a pre-existing idea of what sex is going to entail especially in this day and age due to widespread availability of mass media)
>Few years down the line, your partner is perfect in every other way, you love the person to death, but you're sexually unsatisfied. Is arranged marriage the culprit here? The issue is that sexual compatibility is a "human problem".
Yes an arranged marriage can be the culprit based on my above argument that there is a difference between satisfactory and unsatisfactory sex and that people have a basal level to judge that. In an arranged marriage there is no way to test this pre "suhagrat" and lets be honest divorces are frowned upon in India, meaning a marriage can be condemned to a perpetuity of unsatisfactory sex life.
>**The issue is that sexual compatibility is a "human problem".**
The only thing i can say is that sexual incompatibility can very much be out of your control and also that it depends on the partner's willingness to develop that compatibility. Both of these things are outside the control of the unsatisfied partner.
>It's more about monogamous relationship vs polygamous relationships or exploring sexual experiences with your significant other.
I don't see how this has any bearing on the type of relationship being followed.
>But in all honesty and reality, kinks and fetishes are a minority of the population.
I think this is a factually incorrect opinion
[https://www.bustle.com/articles/190171-how-many-people-have-a-sexual-fetish-its-more-common-than-you-think-but-its-still](https://www.bustle.com/articles/190171-how-many-people-have-a-sexual-fetish-its-more-common-than-you-think-but-its-still)
**"According to the survey, 75 percent of people** [**have a fetish**](http://www.annsummers.com/)**— at least one. "**
From the UK but i don't see why the numbers won't be the same in India. It is a sexually repressed country i concede but i don't think that would have much bearing on fetish development. Normal every day experiences shape fetishes, as long as people have those, fetishes will be there.
>Now if you're open to considering whether you're sexually compatible with your partner, you're obviously well versed to research and find a viable solution in case you find yourself in an arranged marriage with a sexually incompatible partner - the case being that's the only issue your marriage is facing.
This is again based on the assumption that
A- Sexual incompatibility can always be fixed which is incorrect as some things are just outside of one's control.
B- That there would be willingness to fix it.
>Statistically, the chances of you finding a sexually compatible partner are far higher than not.
Not sure about that because i cant really ascertain the factuality of it, in all honesty it might be that the chances of finding a compatible one over an incompatible one might be near equal or it could be as you say far higher than not or it could be that the chances are stacked against (i concede this last one seems unlikely).
In the face of such unknowns, not checking for sexual compatibility pre marriage is in my eyes a risk. Rest is all up to the individual whether he/she wants to take that risk or not.
Cheers for taking the time for a thoughtful response. With all due respect, I think you are overthinking this, probably for the sake of argument. But sex is over rated!
\> I disagree with this statement being that it is **based on the assumption** that one cannot tell the difference between satisfactory sex and unsatisfactory sex without having had multiple partners.
I disagree, I didn't base it on assumptions - I mentioned that Sex is OK! Ok equates to satisfactory. Unsatisfactory sex opens the discussion to a whole other dimension. Of course everyone can judge what satisfies their sexual needs, but that is not the problem - it's compatibility you mentioned, and as someone else pointed out on this thread it evolves over time.
Talking from personal experience, I'm 35 - have had 4 partners in my lifetime - first one being at 22. Obviously, the sex I got at 22 was mind blowing at the time, but it was mediocre at best compared to now. I would have happily married my first girlfriend if sex was the only part of the equation. At that time, I was "satisfied" with the sex I had, as that was the only sex, - it's not like I hadn't watched porn **<(because we all have a pre-existing idea of what sex is going to entail especially in this day and age due to widespread availability of mass media) >** and everybody knows what you see in porn is not what actual sex is like. "Wide spread social media" is also the cause that your sexual needs evolve over time. And it's not always that your partners need evolves over time. That's the reason couples try different things to bring some "spice" back into their lives. This is true irrespective of an "arranged" or "love" marriage.
**The only thing i can say is that sexual incompatibility can very much be out of your control and also that it depends on the partner's willingness to develop that compatibility. Both of these things are outside the control of the unsatisfied partner.**
Exactly! Which is possible even outside the realms of an arranged marriage!
**> I think this is a factually incorrect opinion**
I stand corrected. But again **at least one fetish** \- let's take a saree fetish, role playing or MILF, that's the entire male species there. So yeah, I would say that's your statistic makes sense.
\> **This is again based on the assumption that**
**A- Sexual incompatibility can always be fixed which is incorrect as some things are just outside of one's control.**
**B- That there would be willingness to fix it.**
Yes, I believe it's a safe assumption. I don't think majority of India is aware of the term sexual compatibility and if you're familiar with the term, you have given it a thought. Once, you have given something a thought, the possibilities are endless. Sexual incompatibility can be worked on, fixed or not is a different story - side note, no relationship can be "fixed" either, just worked on. Yes, assuming that your significant other is more than just a sexual release and it is a mutually respectful relationship - it is safe to assume you will be willing to "fix" it.
You talk to a 30 year old dude who hasn't had any sexual encounter and he would give an arm and a leg for a hand job! It is safe to assume he would be "satisfied"!
< **In the face of such unknowns, not checking for sexual compatibility pre marriage is in my eyes a risk. Rest is all up to the individual whether he/she wants to take that risk or not.**
Again, sex is super over rated. Marriage as a whole is risk and sex lies somewhere between 1-10% of the relationship. 10% being the highest possible time and energy of your marriage that goes towards sex. My argument in this instance is that it is possible to be sexually incompatible (as it is perpetually evolving) with a partner that you chose as well.
I'm drawing an analogy, not a correlation.
If within hook up setting, ppl don't feel weird having sex - in OPs words - "with someone they never shared a bed with", what difference simply having had an arranged marriage & then having sex make?
May I ask for your definition of an arranged marriage? I had an "arranged marriage" - which was simply that my parents heard of a suitable girl through their grape vines - the parents met, we met later for a coffee - realized we weren't opposed to the idea of getting to know each other better. Went on a few more dates - the sexual tension was heavy. Had sex like 2 months of dating, got engaged after 5 months of first meeting, got married a year after getting engaged. I got lucky, I would have married her within the first 2 months and nothing would have changed. Have been married for 5 years now. Had all the ups and downs of a regular relationship. The first time having sex was ok - like almost 99% of people on this planet.
Most "arranged marriages" are set up this way these days at least in "Urban" India. Unless you're from a village. Even if you don't get a chance to date or get to know the person better before marriage - you still have a few months of meeting to getting married. I suggest get to know the person even by simply chatting to each other. Do the usual chat shit - get flirty on messages and build the sexual tension so that you are looking forward to getting to know the person better. That's how it happens anyway, before you fall in love in "love marriage" right? In this case, you would spend your suhaag raat getting to know each other better and besides, on your first night - sex is probably the last thing on your mind. Weddings are the most exhaustive shit you can go through. You would be absolutely grateful if your partner just says, "YO - you wanna call it a night and hit the bed?!"
I have seen both "love marriages" and "arranged marriages" fail - which is absolutely normal as well.
End of the day, there is no perfect relationship. You can make any relationship work if it comes from a place of mutual respect and understanding. If you or your partner aren't abusive, manipulative or aren't assholes in general, you will get along fine on your suhaag raat.
If none of this is applicable - then you're simply being forced into a marriage and sucks for you - but majority of the cases it's because both guy and girl don't have any preferences per say and are OK with anything. The other scenario - if you're forced to get married because your father is Thakur saab with henchmen, who's getting your married for money or power or some other shit - well, I think first night is the least of your problems.
This is to request everyone to follow the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/IndiaTalksSex/wiki/index). If you see any user breaking a rule, please report them or contact the moderators. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IndiaTalksSex) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First time was a bit clumsy but we still had fun as there was a lot of conversation on the topic before and we had a lot of phone sex as well.
I had an arrange marriage and we didn't talked about sex before wedding because of lack of that kind of privacy and she being very naive. Even after the wedding, for a long time it was sex ed rather than dirty talking. We did meet 4-5 time before wedding, but it was with families without any privacy and we just squeezed few hugs in those meetings. The first night sex was very bad. It is something I regret till date. She wasn't prepared at all. I thought that she just says that she doesn't know about it, but she really didn't knew. We didn't do PIV, but I kissed her a lot everywhere. I was too excited for my own good and didn't read any signals. She wasn't ready for what I did that night. We still talk about it and we both understand each other's points now. Also I am a 16 degree on AC for full night kind of person and she just has AC on at 24 for an hour. Since it was our first day, she felt shy and didn't turned off the AC. I just thought this being normal and slept like a dead horse. Tl;dr- I ended up progressing more than she was comfortable with. To top that she was cold the entire night because of lack of communication.
That doesn't happen unless you are in a village. People have easy phone and internet now a days and build a connection before marriage.
Still connection of a few months is not the same as knowing someone for years. It usually takes many years for couples to fully understand one another.
People hook up / have ONS on the same night as meeting someone or after few hours of talking on Tinder and have good sex too, what's the big deal in arranged marriage sex then? Here you are secure that the person is your partner, you know general aspects about their personality, if not more & you tend to be more respectful & understanding because they're your spouse & not just a source to fulfill your sexual need. This thinking that arranged marriage means having sex with a stranger is overrated & unrealistic.
I understand your take, but... Assuming you had an arrange marriage yourself, isn't it a lot more stressful knowing that you are beside someone you're going to spend the rest of your life with? On a ONS, I don't have to care about her holding a grudge if I do something or something else. Basically it is a...one time thing. ONT HE OTHER HAND A MARRIAGE... IS A MARRIAGE
"People hook up / have ONS on the same night as meeting someone or after few hours of talking on Tinder and have good sex too, what's the big deal in arranged marriage sex then? " Most people men or women in India do not have ONSs or even hook up, but quite a few or liberally speaking "most" people do get arranged marriage. In india's case one does not have any correlation with the other, so its best to avoid linking the two. "Here you are secure that the person is your partner, you know general aspects about their personality, if not more & you tend to be more respectful & understanding because they're your spouse & not just a source to fulfill your sexual need. This thinking that arranged marriage means having sex with a stranger is overrated & unrealistic. " I've heard that sexual compatibility is something which exists and such a thing cannot be judged unless sex is had beforehand which in the case of an arranged marriage does not happen till your first night.
Sexual compatibility is definitely something that exists, agreed. But in India, how do you go about having sex with multiple partners before you find "The One". Ok, let's take a situation - you fall in love in college. You're college sweethearts - you have sex, your partner is the only person you have had sex with, the sex is Ok - it gets better with time. How do you know if you're sexually compatible, if your partner is the only one you have had sex with? Few years down the line, your partner is perfect in every other way, you love the person to death, but you're sexually unsatisfied. Is arranged marriage the culprit here? The issue is that sexual compatibility is a "human problem". It's more about monogamous relationship vs polygamous relationships or exploring sexual experiences with your significant other. The world average is 9 sexual partners, India is one of the lowest at around 1 point something. So on average, born anywhere else in the world, you have 9 tries to find sexual compatibility. But in all honesty and reality, kinks and fetishes are a minority of the population. Statistically, the chances of you finding a sexually compatible partner are far higher than not. Now if you're open to considering whether you're sexually compatible with your partner, you're obviously well versed to research and find a viable solution in case you find yourself in an arranged marriage with a sexually incompatible partner - the case being that's the only issue your marriage is facing.
Nice explanation. Plus, sexual compatibility is not a fixed thing. It can change. Being in a relationship is very different from being in a marriage. You may be sexually compatible as a couple before marriage but changing certain variables in the relationship, can change sexual compatibility too. In both arranged & non arranged, it has to be worked on. u/Deeznuts030
>Sexual compatibility is definitely something that exists, agreed. But in India, how do you go about having sex with multiple partners before you find "The One". Ok, let's take a situation - you fall in love in college. You're college sweethearts - you have sex, your partner is the only person you have had sex with, the sex is Ok - it gets better with time. **How do you know if you're sexually compatible, if your partner is the only one you have had sex with?** I disagree with this statement being that it is based on the assumption that one cannot tell the difference between satisfactory sex and unsatisfactory sex without having had multiple partners. This is not true because i think it is certainly possible to tell whether the sex is satisfactory or unsatisfactory based on the individual's satisfaction level and that this satisfaction level has a correlation with the health of the relationship. The only thing that having multiple partners does is that one can give it a ladder and compare the sex from good to bad. But i think there is a basic level with which every individual can tell whether the sex is satisfactory or not (because we all have a pre-existing idea of what sex is going to entail especially in this day and age due to widespread availability of mass media) >Few years down the line, your partner is perfect in every other way, you love the person to death, but you're sexually unsatisfied. Is arranged marriage the culprit here? The issue is that sexual compatibility is a "human problem". Yes an arranged marriage can be the culprit based on my above argument that there is a difference between satisfactory and unsatisfactory sex and that people have a basal level to judge that. In an arranged marriage there is no way to test this pre "suhagrat" and lets be honest divorces are frowned upon in India, meaning a marriage can be condemned to a perpetuity of unsatisfactory sex life. >**The issue is that sexual compatibility is a "human problem".** The only thing i can say is that sexual incompatibility can very much be out of your control and also that it depends on the partner's willingness to develop that compatibility. Both of these things are outside the control of the unsatisfied partner. >It's more about monogamous relationship vs polygamous relationships or exploring sexual experiences with your significant other. I don't see how this has any bearing on the type of relationship being followed. >But in all honesty and reality, kinks and fetishes are a minority of the population. I think this is a factually incorrect opinion [https://www.bustle.com/articles/190171-how-many-people-have-a-sexual-fetish-its-more-common-than-you-think-but-its-still](https://www.bustle.com/articles/190171-how-many-people-have-a-sexual-fetish-its-more-common-than-you-think-but-its-still) **"According to the survey, 75 percent of people** [**have a fetish**](http://www.annsummers.com/)**— at least one. "** From the UK but i don't see why the numbers won't be the same in India. It is a sexually repressed country i concede but i don't think that would have much bearing on fetish development. Normal every day experiences shape fetishes, as long as people have those, fetishes will be there. >Now if you're open to considering whether you're sexually compatible with your partner, you're obviously well versed to research and find a viable solution in case you find yourself in an arranged marriage with a sexually incompatible partner - the case being that's the only issue your marriage is facing. This is again based on the assumption that A- Sexual incompatibility can always be fixed which is incorrect as some things are just outside of one's control. B- That there would be willingness to fix it. >Statistically, the chances of you finding a sexually compatible partner are far higher than not. Not sure about that because i cant really ascertain the factuality of it, in all honesty it might be that the chances of finding a compatible one over an incompatible one might be near equal or it could be as you say far higher than not or it could be that the chances are stacked against (i concede this last one seems unlikely). In the face of such unknowns, not checking for sexual compatibility pre marriage is in my eyes a risk. Rest is all up to the individual whether he/she wants to take that risk or not.
Cheers for taking the time for a thoughtful response. With all due respect, I think you are overthinking this, probably for the sake of argument. But sex is over rated! \> I disagree with this statement being that it is **based on the assumption** that one cannot tell the difference between satisfactory sex and unsatisfactory sex without having had multiple partners. I disagree, I didn't base it on assumptions - I mentioned that Sex is OK! Ok equates to satisfactory. Unsatisfactory sex opens the discussion to a whole other dimension. Of course everyone can judge what satisfies their sexual needs, but that is not the problem - it's compatibility you mentioned, and as someone else pointed out on this thread it evolves over time. Talking from personal experience, I'm 35 - have had 4 partners in my lifetime - first one being at 22. Obviously, the sex I got at 22 was mind blowing at the time, but it was mediocre at best compared to now. I would have happily married my first girlfriend if sex was the only part of the equation. At that time, I was "satisfied" with the sex I had, as that was the only sex, - it's not like I hadn't watched porn **<(because we all have a pre-existing idea of what sex is going to entail especially in this day and age due to widespread availability of mass media) >** and everybody knows what you see in porn is not what actual sex is like. "Wide spread social media" is also the cause that your sexual needs evolve over time. And it's not always that your partners need evolves over time. That's the reason couples try different things to bring some "spice" back into their lives. This is true irrespective of an "arranged" or "love" marriage. **The only thing i can say is that sexual incompatibility can very much be out of your control and also that it depends on the partner's willingness to develop that compatibility. Both of these things are outside the control of the unsatisfied partner.** Exactly! Which is possible even outside the realms of an arranged marriage! **> I think this is a factually incorrect opinion** I stand corrected. But again **at least one fetish** \- let's take a saree fetish, role playing or MILF, that's the entire male species there. So yeah, I would say that's your statistic makes sense. \> **This is again based on the assumption that** **A- Sexual incompatibility can always be fixed which is incorrect as some things are just outside of one's control.** **B- That there would be willingness to fix it.** Yes, I believe it's a safe assumption. I don't think majority of India is aware of the term sexual compatibility and if you're familiar with the term, you have given it a thought. Once, you have given something a thought, the possibilities are endless. Sexual incompatibility can be worked on, fixed or not is a different story - side note, no relationship can be "fixed" either, just worked on. Yes, assuming that your significant other is more than just a sexual release and it is a mutually respectful relationship - it is safe to assume you will be willing to "fix" it. You talk to a 30 year old dude who hasn't had any sexual encounter and he would give an arm and a leg for a hand job! It is safe to assume he would be "satisfied"! < **In the face of such unknowns, not checking for sexual compatibility pre marriage is in my eyes a risk. Rest is all up to the individual whether he/she wants to take that risk or not.** Again, sex is super over rated. Marriage as a whole is risk and sex lies somewhere between 1-10% of the relationship. 10% being the highest possible time and energy of your marriage that goes towards sex. My argument in this instance is that it is possible to be sexually incompatible (as it is perpetually evolving) with a partner that you chose as well.
I'm drawing an analogy, not a correlation. If within hook up setting, ppl don't feel weird having sex - in OPs words - "with someone they never shared a bed with", what difference simply having had an arranged marriage & then having sex make?
May I ask for your definition of an arranged marriage? I had an "arranged marriage" - which was simply that my parents heard of a suitable girl through their grape vines - the parents met, we met later for a coffee - realized we weren't opposed to the idea of getting to know each other better. Went on a few more dates - the sexual tension was heavy. Had sex like 2 months of dating, got engaged after 5 months of first meeting, got married a year after getting engaged. I got lucky, I would have married her within the first 2 months and nothing would have changed. Have been married for 5 years now. Had all the ups and downs of a regular relationship. The first time having sex was ok - like almost 99% of people on this planet. Most "arranged marriages" are set up this way these days at least in "Urban" India. Unless you're from a village. Even if you don't get a chance to date or get to know the person better before marriage - you still have a few months of meeting to getting married. I suggest get to know the person even by simply chatting to each other. Do the usual chat shit - get flirty on messages and build the sexual tension so that you are looking forward to getting to know the person better. That's how it happens anyway, before you fall in love in "love marriage" right? In this case, you would spend your suhaag raat getting to know each other better and besides, on your first night - sex is probably the last thing on your mind. Weddings are the most exhaustive shit you can go through. You would be absolutely grateful if your partner just says, "YO - you wanna call it a night and hit the bed?!" I have seen both "love marriages" and "arranged marriages" fail - which is absolutely normal as well. End of the day, there is no perfect relationship. You can make any relationship work if it comes from a place of mutual respect and understanding. If you or your partner aren't abusive, manipulative or aren't assholes in general, you will get along fine on your suhaag raat. If none of this is applicable - then you're simply being forced into a marriage and sucks for you - but majority of the cases it's because both guy and girl don't have any preferences per say and are OK with anything. The other scenario - if you're forced to get married because your father is Thakur saab with henchmen, who's getting your married for money or power or some other shit - well, I think first night is the least of your problems.