body language

I'm looking for body language 101. Male therapist - female client . I've had bad experiences before, not with therapist but men in general where they've crossed boundaries. I'm not good at reading b.l.. I'm a fidgety person so I'm constantly moving around , play with me hair , playing with rings and necklace..I never quite know what to do with my hands .I want to figure out if my own body language isnt being misunderstood.
I have a lot of sexual abuse issues so talk about sex naturally comes up. The thing that makes me wonder is that sometimes he sits with legs spread., that isn't his normal way of sitting. It just feels odd. . I'm not accusing him of anything, it just freaks me out alittle.
Any ideas???

i think if you hav been around abuse, then him spreading his legs is a normal thing for you to notice and think about. personally, that would be so distracting and bothering to me. i would probably not get very far because i wouldnt' be able to stop focusing on that. i think if it bothers you, you might want to talk to him about it. let him know that it makes you uncomfortable, and why, and i think he would be more than happy to talk about it with you, and maybe change his position

I think that is just a guy thing. Not saying that you wouldn't be bothered by it with your past history... Most guys sit that way unless they have a leg crossed over the other one...

Generally, that just means the person is comfortable and confident. As CSA we often read things into very innocent mannerisms that just really aren't there. If it bothers you, ask him about it.

Thanks to all. I was afraid that I was being too sensitive . I didn't want to make an issue out of it.

I think it's a pretty natural way for men to sit--they tend to spread out and take up a lot of space, physically and (in my opinion) psychologically.

I'm like you, I notice and am wary of a lot of "masculine" cues. My T had his sleeves rolled up once, exposing his forearms and it was very worrying for me. I did not like it at all.

I do think it can be good to talk about these things with T--sometimes when I feel like T's gaze is too intense, if he turns his body to the diagonal I feel a lot less pressure. T is a good place to discuss how we react to bodies and space. It's practice for the outside world, to see what you are sensitive about and how you feel comfortable interacting.

It would bother me too, but I do think it is a natural way that men sit when they are relaxed. It might actually be a good thing if interpreted that way. He's not upset by anything you have to say.

If you feel comfortable about it, I would try to bring up your discomfort to him. It is a lot of openess. It would bug me.

Are you sitting face to face? I would feel uncomfortable. You are trying to open your soul and it might be too much...in your face so to speak. Is there a table between you? I personally would like a few boundaries. He might be trying to portrait a feeling of openness but if you had that you probably wouldn't even be there. I would feel more comfortable sitting perpendicular...not sure if thats the right word, and have a desk between us. I would feel too vulnerable any other way and would have a hard time opening up.

As a client I sit that way in therapy and my therapist has her legs crossed. It's my way of expressing I'm comfortable and trying to be open and honest.

There's a really good book by a former fbi agent I think....Joe Navarro....What Every Body Is Saying. I loved it. I took some courses on body language for continuing ed too.

I think i read somewhere that if they sit like that (a guy, that is) it means they are relaxed and open to interacting with you. Like if they cross their legs and/or arms it means they are being defensive. I think if i had sexual abuse in my history I would freak out about it too.. that is perfectly understandable.

Others have responded to the question about males sitting with legs uncrossed. But about your question about your own body language--I think this is a great thing to ask your therapist. He is male so he may be more sensitive to signals coming from a female. What better person to ask?! Maybe he will say that playing with hair and jewelry gives off certain signals. If so, I didn't know that, but I'm not a guy. My therapist has told me a few things from a guy perspective that I never would have guessed. Go ahead and ask.

In nonverbal communication, looking at the other person while you are speaking is considered a "power" position, where looking at the other person while he is speaking is considered submissive.

Playing with hair and jewelry is also considered a "submissive" posture, especially if one is tilting one's neck to the side in order to do so.

I've had two male T's and neither one sat in that traditional male posture, both cross their legs and point their crotch away from me, their upper body relaxed and aligned with me. I do the same, except I like to sit up on the couch with my back to the arm, in cross legged position or some variation of lotus.

In general I do not like men to sit across from me with their crotch pointed at me. You may interpret that as you will, Dr. Freud (said to no one in particular).

My T sits the exactly same way- I knew he learnt it in T's school.

Playing with one's hair could be a nervous thing, could be a seductive thing- I've seen it done both ways and you can tell the difference.
I too have a CSA history and wondered if I'm sending some sex vibes- asked my T and no he can't see it. However, he told me that 1. it's common for guys to hit on girls they like and I'm just hypersensitive about it and always blame myself for it (i.e. like it's a bad thing- which it isn't) 2. some guys (but only few of them) can tell when they see an "easy prey"- someone who is scared- and get off on it (happen to me only once- some sleazy guy in a bar).
His sitting position is kind of weird though- it doesn't have to mean a thing- but you should feel safe enough with your T to be able to tell him how you feel about it.

I talked to T. He apologized , said that he was sorry that I was uncomfortable. You gave me other perspecives. thanks to all

Of course you're entitled to that view. I had the reverse situation. I'm male with a female T and she would sit crossed legged with her legs pointing away from me whilst I sat with my legs open. I confronted her about this because it seemed like she wasn't interested. She now sits with her legs pointing at me. I'm not comfortable with women sitting with their legs pointing away while talking to me because it comes across as ignorance.

Just to give you a bit of feedback on this to consider. All of us have things that we are uncomfortable with, and that is just the way things go when you have issues that take you to therapy. I do think that you go beyond that here, though, by making your uncomfortableness about the other person. Your interpretation that this sitting behavior says something at all, much less "ignorance", about the other person, is unlikely to not only be accurate, but also to be alienating to the other person. Your issue with discomfort is *not* about the other person, it's about what the behavior means to you, and understanding what that's about is likely to move you forward rather than backwards. Labeling women ignorant because they don't sit the way you prefer is going backwards, not forwards.

Perhaps you are uncomfortable with it because you feel ignored by a woman in that sitting position, or because you feel that she is signaling a lack of sexual availability to you. Whatever it is, this is about you, not about the women who may choose to sit across from you.

Actually if you read about body language, you'll know that a crossed legged sitting position with the legs pointing away means the person is not interested. Not just sexually but in general towards the other person. Since I'm paying for psychotherapy I'd like the T to be interested for at least the 50 minutes. So I confronted her about this.

Where is the connection between not interested and ignorance?

Wow. I'm really glad my therapist sits with his legs crossed.

Well I think it's ignorant not to be interested in that situation.

The interpretation of that finding (like any scientific one) is that there is a general trend that that sitting position is correlated with a lack of interest. It does not mean that every person who sits like that is uninterested, and every person who sits "properly" according to you IS interested. The scientific finding just means that is is more likely that a person who sits in that position is interested. And I'd wager that your T was no more interested after she adapted her sitting position.

But I think that the point I was suggesting that you consider is that when dealing with an actual person as part of a dyad, it seems like a more productive approach to actually try to understand whether said person is said thing ("uninterested" or "ignorant" or whatever) rather than assume it, even if your assumption is grounded in some factual or general understanding about what many or most people do. I guess I think it would make more sense to understand why you make that assumption and why you interpret it with this particular T in this particular moment, and that doesn't change regardless of what the science suggests is generally true. I think when you make assumptions or interpretations about what someone is thinking or feeling, you poison your relationships.

But if all you wanted to do was manipulate your T into sitting the way you prefer, then I suppose you handled it exactly right.

So may you please explain why a man sitting open legged makes you uncomfortable. Or is this double standards? The way I see it, my T would sit with legs crossed facing away, I would sit open legged because I wanted to be honest and open. You are uncomfortable with men sitting like this.

Interesting. Because sitting open-legged is aggressive or indicative of being one-up? I.e. it's a dominant position while sitting with legs pointed away is submissive? So the ladies are saying yes, male dominance is automatically perceived as negative in the therapeutic situation and are not apologizing for it. Sounds like.

I think what's confusing is that there are two dynamics here: gender and T/client.

Ts usually try to adopt a "submissive" posture regardless of gender. While a man sitting open legged may be considered an open and honest position in relation to another man, I suspect few women would interpret it this way in relation to a woman.

To impose an interpretation that is counter to the experience of the person who's receiving it, is a dominant gesture in itself, regardless of circumstance or intention.