Sex Talk Gambits: The Sexual Perversion Gambit

Hey guys and welcome back.

It is time for a gambit—a sex talk gambit, that is. It has been a while since I have covered a gambit. This does not mean that I haven’t come up with materials. The ongoing pandemic makes it more difficult to test gambits in field. I will never share anything that I haven’t tested properly.

Today’s new gambit is the bomb. It will allow you to:

• Talk about sex

• Reframe sexual abstinence and sexual restrictions as bad

• Promote a frame of spontaneity, openness, and curiosity

All these factors can have a huge effect on your results. If your frame is to get sexual with a girl, it will become much easier to proceed, and you will not be too many steps away from bedding her.

I need to address what I always stress:

• Gambits, including this one, can be used as presented.

• You can make variations (more complex or shorter versions) using your own words. The results will be similar if you convey the essential gist and use key mechanics. So use this gambit as an inspiration for your personal gambits.

• Take the mechanics from this and previous gambits to create your own gambit from scratch.

My results with this gambit has led to:

• Multiple lays in a very smooth and efficient manner

• Great hooks if not lays (the lay did not happen due to other circumstances)

• No bad reactions or rejections so far

I have been using this gambit since the second half of 2021 and for part of the winter. I stopped due to lockdowns and not being able to head out (this will soon change, so I will be using it again). Other experienced seducers have also had success with it.

Let’s begin. First, we will discuss “perversion” and what it means.

 

What Is Sexual Perversion?

This gambit was inspired by the philosophy of sex, especially the philosophy of “what is perversion?” Chase and I have been reading much about this subject, and it’s fascinating. While reading, I realized that the concept of perversion has become “perverted” in the public domain. Most people have no clue what perversion truly means.

Here’s a simple definition: Perversion is when one uses, performs, or lives in a manner not in accordance with the subject’s or object’s intended purpose.

The concept of perversion can apply to all areas of life. Philosopher Jerold Levinson in his essay Sexual Perversity, gives this example:

“Ivan is a gifted pianist, but spends most of his time at the keyboard playing simple blues progressions over and over. Sarah is fluent in French, but avoids every opportunity to converse in that language. Greg lives in a household whose kitchen offers an assortment of tantalizing foods, yet he never eats anything except bagels and cream cheese. Melinda has many friends, with whom she would enjoy socializing, but she forgoes their company to devote all her free time to video games. Clive is a champion mountain climber, but has lately taken to never venturing out of the house. Esther has a masters degree in comparative literature, but now reads nothing but Harlequin romances. And Phil is partial to the Allegros in Bach's Brandenburg Concerti, but only as background music for dancing, not as something to listen to with attention. I think it would be agreed that the behavior of all the above individuals is perverse. But why is that? What makes for the perversity that so strikes us in their behaviors? I suggest that it is the fact that they are individuals who are signally failing to exploit the capacities and opportunities that they possess to make life satisfying and worthwhile. Absent special explanations, to behave as they are doing would seem to be, as the saying goes, a ‘perversion of their talents.’.”

(Jerold Levinson, Sexual Perversity, The Monist: Perversion 86(1), Oxford University Press: January 2003, p. 30.)

As you can see, perversion (Levinson uses the word “perversity”) is when one is not living their ideal version. Opting for an incomplete or suboptimal version of X is a perversion of X.

How does this relate to sex?

Conservative and religious views of sex usually portray ideal, complete, and optimal sex leading to reproduction. So sexual acts not linked to reproduction (or an attempt at reproducing) are perverse. For these reasons, sodomy, oral sex, masturbation (!), homosexuality (including lesbianism), non-conventional kinks and fetishes, and even most forms of casual sex outside of deep relationships, other than marriage (monogamy is usually the ideal set up for reproduction and child-rearing) are deemed perverse. This is especially true in Christian and Islam religions (and probably Judaism, though I have limited knowledge there). These religions often have strong moral views about perversion (what is perverse is immoral), whereas modern theories do not necessarily have a strong moral view. It’s usually a dimension of desirability versus undesirability.

Undoubtedly, the past inspires western culture, and many moral concepts stem from old religious ideals. The notion of sexual perversion is a clear example. Most of our ideas about perversion are from the old conservative view: all sex that is odd, dirty, or overly casual (especially when the frequency of casual sex is high). But people rarely know what perversion truly means when it comes to sex. Sexual perversion is just a usage of sex and sexual practices considered “incomplete” or “less than ideal.” Perversion is not synonymous with “dirtiness” and has never been. However, conservative Christian concepts link perversion to these ideas, but perverse acts are not really perverse because they are deemed dirty, but because they are incomplete, and incomplete acts happen to be “dirty.” This is important to understand.

What is perverse depends on how one views sex and what they put into it. What one person considers to be optimal and suboptimal sex or complete and incomplete sex. Someone may add a moral dimension to perversion; another may not. Here are some famous modern conceptions of sexual perversion:

• Roger Scruton’s theory: Sex without deep emotional bonds (love) is perverse (Roger Scruton, Sexual Desire: A Philosophical Investigation, Continuum: Cornwall, 2006).

• Thomas Nagel’s theory: Sex without established interhuman relations is deemed perverse (Thomas Nagel, “Sexual Perversion,” Journal of Philosophy 66(1), January 1969).

• Jessica Begon’s theory: Perverted sex is sex without consent (I disagree with this concept because lack of consent is just immoral and not perverted.) (Jessica Begon, “Sexual Perversion: A Liberal Account,” Journal of Social Philosophy 50(3), Fall 2019).

We will focus on Jerold Levinson’s theory of perversion (or perversity). His theory is broad as it allows for numerous conceptions of “good sex.” Non-perverted sex is sexual practices that enhance human flourishing, whether discovering oneself, another person, or establishing bonds with another. This allows one to accrue many human goods such as love, intimacy, pleasure, trust, tenderness, togetherness, and even transcendence of self. It lets one gain the potential for giving life value through sexuality. The idea is to develop one’s full sexual potential. On the contrary, making suboptimal sexual choices inhibits the fulfillment of one’s true sexual potential and is considered perverse.

You can see how this allows us to set good frames for pickup and seduction: good sex is when you develop and live up to your sexual potential. It’s a sex-positive view that adds another dimension and significance to sex, including casual sex (though Levinson believes non-casual sex to be better).

Today’s routine is based on this theory.

 

The Sexual Perversion Sex Talk Gambit

Now that you know more about perversion, let’s jump into the gambit. First, I will share some transitions since many guys struggle with starting sex talk.

 

Transition Examples

Here are some suggestions:

Alek: Do you know what I dislike?

Her: What?

Alek: Perverted people.

Her: Okay?

Alek: But, believe it or not, it is not what you think it is.

Her: Oh yeah?

Alek: Let me elaborate.

You grab her attention and make her curious about what you mean by your seemingly judgmental statement. Most girls do not like judgmental men and want to hear you out to confront you. However, she will soon realize that your view of perversion is not what she expected. So, the power of hooking her in is there since she really wants to disagree and call you out on your BS.

Here is another one even easier to pull off.

Alek: You know what? I’ve been reading some interesting stuff lately.

Her: Oh yeah?

Alek: Yeah, about perversion and sexual perversion.

Her: Ah, really?

Alek: Yeah, and I realized most people don’t know what it truly means.

Her: Really?

Alek: Let me elaborate.

Simple. Everyone has an idea about perversion, and you saying she likely has it wrong will intrigue her.

And another transition:

Alek: I am curious about something, by the way.

Her: And what is that?

Alek: What is a perverted person or man?

Let her describe it, then correct her using the gambit I am about to present (or your version).

 

The Meat of the Gambit

You can use any transition. Let’s use this one:

Alek: You know what? I’ve been reading some interesting stuff lately.

Her: Oh yeah?

Alek: Yeah, about perversion and sexual perversion.

Her: Ah, really?

Alek: Yeah, and I realized most people don’t know what it truly means.

Her: Really?

We are in. Now for the gambit.

Alek: Most people assume that perversion is about liking weird stuff, being dirty, or being overly sexual, but this is the wrong definition.

Her: Really?

Alek: In fact, the notion of perversion stems from old Christian conservative beliefs.

Her: Okay.

Alek: Perversion is when someone acts in a suboptimal, less than ideal way toward something, and your actions and behavior are a perversion of that. Let’s say you have the potential to become a great musician. Instead of practicing music, you sit on your butt and don’t fulfill your purpose; one may say you are perverted because you are not living up to your full potential.

Her: I see

If she says, “I disagree,” say:

Alek: That’s fine, but the point is, perversion is simply when one opts for an incomplete or unideal form of something— that’s the true definition. Perversion has nothing directly to do with sex or being dirty.

Her: I see.

Alek: So, where does the conventional conception of perversion come from? The form where we associate perversion with someone who likes certain sexual practices or loves sex for the sake of pleasure?

Her: I don’t know.

Alek: Well, it stems from the old ideal that perfect or “complete” sex is is done with the intention of reproducing. Any sex that does not live up to this ideal is deemed perverted. So anal sex, oral sex, kinkiness, and homosexuality are all seen as perverted. How can we even claim oral sex to be perverted? Talk about being stuck up, haha.

Her: I see, and I agree

Alek: But such conceptions are outdated. Some have sex for the sake of pleasure, and I agree. However, I have been reading about an interesting theory on perversion that I also agree with.

Her: What’s that?

Alek: When you have GOOD sex with someone and feel truly connected and immersed with the other person and the moment and the seduction is mutual, you get a lot more out of it!

Her: True!

Alek: You get to know someone, create new bonds, discover yourself sexually, gain sexual experience, learn about your own desire and sexuality.

Her: Indeed!

Alek: So, according to this theory, ideal sex is when you discover yourself and your sexuality, as well as creating other bonds. It’s when you learn about and develop your sexuality and sexual persona.

Her: I agree. (How can one not agree with that?)

What’s going on here?

You are enhancing the definition of perversion and adding a sex-positive dimension. You are not framing perversion as being sexual, experiencing pleasure, or enjoying the beauty of sex outside of reproduction. Complete sex is now linked to good sex where discovering oneself and their partner is paramount. So you remove the judgmental dimension and also get to set good sex as a requirement, something most people (especially men) often leave out. The points you mention about complete sex are things most women (and people) truly desire.

The best part of the gambit is yet to come:

Alek: It’s interesting that with this more modern theory of perversion, all types of sex become permitted, including kinkiness, fantasies, anal sex, oral sex, and of course, casual sex. How can one consider these perverted, anyway?

Her: True!

Alek: And what is even more fascinating is that sexual abstinence and holding back are also perverse, since no sex means suboptimal sex! How can one discover oneself sexually and discover other people and build relationships with them? How can one flourish sexually through abstinence?

Her: So true!

Alek: So, abstinence and holding back, and not living out one’s sex life according to one’s full potential would thus be a form of perversion according to this theory. I agree with that, since people who have a healthy sexual sex life tend to be more mentally stable, whereas abstinence could potentially cause neuroticism (good old psychoanalysis here. For more, feel free to read Wilhelm Reich’s book The Sexual Revolution.)

Her: That’s an interesting take.

Alek: And I am pro-good mental health.

Okay, now things get really interesting.

You reframe: “holding back” and “sexual abstinence” as perverse and unhealthy. You reframe the usual convention that “lots of sex is bad and perverse” to “not enough sex is perverse and unhealthy.” Whether she agrees or not is irrelevant. What is essential is that you have conveyed that:

• You are a liberated guy who will not judge her.

• You are sex-positive and disagree with sex-negative views.

Both are frames that will, at worst, make her feel comfortable hooking up with you. At best, she will agree with your theory because she wants to, as this theory is liberating. She will think you are a genius and will love you for it: a win-win in both cases.

 

Mechanisms at Play

What is happening behind the scenes with this sexual perversion gambit?

• Framing and reframing of sex-negative views into sex-positive views. This gets her to associate those views with you and affects her perception of you. It also changes the underlying frame of your interaction, setting a sexual and sex-positive tone.

• You frame abstinence and holding back sexual desires as “bad” since you can’t fully discover oneself and one’s relation to others (Jerold Levinson does consider abstinence as perverted in his essay). If she likes your overall sex-positive frame of “ideal sex as when one discovers their full sexual potential,” then she is likely to accept the frame of abstinence being bad.

• Sexual prizing—you are knowledgeable about sex and convey what good sex is and what it should be. It’s powerful stuff.

I have had mind-blowing success with this gambit so far. So try it out.

 

Conclusion

Let’s summarize the main steps of the gambit:

1. Hook her in by letting her know most people do not really understand what perversion is.

2. Explain to her how the usual concept of perversion came to be.

3. Correct the definition by describing what perversion truly is (not living up to the ideal of X).

4. Share a new concept of perversion (I used the example of “discovering oneself and others sexually,” inspired by Levinson’s theory).

5. Frame the opposite as bad. In my case, abstinence and holding back.

Feel free to make a variation of this gambit using your words. Experiment, tweak, and use this as an inspiration to create your own gambit.

Try it out and enjoy the results.

Best,

Alek