why would T do this

The way it sounds from Granite's post is that her T is silent and Granite perceives that as hostile. Unless she is silent when she should be talking (like after being asked a question), then her behavior is to the majority of people, benign. Granite's T doesn't change her behavior because that's not what would happen in the real world. If a t adapts their behavior to accommodate how a client may perceive it, then I don't see how that is helpful, or always even possible. A different client may perceive too many questions as hostile, a T can only adapt her own way of interacting so much. I think of therapy as a safe place to acknowledge our challenges and learn new ways of perceiving and coping with them. We can't expect other people to change behaviors that society in general accepts because we experience them differently. Philosophically this may not seem fair, and maybe it isn't. But it is the reality and one or those instances where you just have to accept it. I think that is

The second therapist I see asked me if I needed more talk from her or less/more distance or less distance/ sitting facing each other or sideways and so forth - so she asked what would help me and was willing to modify for me until my anxiety went down some. So I do believe some are more willing than others to modify their approach to help a client. With the second, because she helped, my anxiety went down a lot in a few months. With the first one I see, it is still fairly high after 4 years and I believe any reduction is due to the second therapist and not the first.

The "real world" argument is very popular but I am not convinced. Therapy is not the real world. It wouldn't work if it were.

To bring the "real world" into the therapy space is a pretty good definition of therapeutic challenge.

(This post toned down in the interest of good manners.)

Which one is "The Woman"?

The one with whom it is still fairly high.

I get the problems with silence. I talked about it with my T 10+ years after we had had several years of silence problems and she replied, "I wish you had let me know, I would have said something". Of course, at the time, that was my problem, I could not speak, was locked inside my own head, debating my imagination and learning the truth of why I could not beat my way out of a wet paper bag.

I don't know if your T can tell every time she is silent how you feel or, ahead of time if "this" time you will feel a particular way. How long exactly does she have to be silent? I would think all of that could change or be different depending on what else is going on? Maybe you can make a bit of a game of it and try to tally when you feel T is angry with you and when it is "okay" and what the differences are/feel like? Maybe saying out loud, "You're angry at me again, aren't you?" will get a bit of a discussion going and get rid of that feeling? It could be that she only understands after you all have hashed out that particular session and how you responded, not beforehand like she can plan and control you?

My T and I discussed body language once too, and she immediately explained she does not even try to do much with body language, she has enough just understanding speech/the conversation/words.

I didnt get that the t was being silent. I thought it was more that granite wasnt focusing or whatever on what the t was saying. Its hard to stay present and listen to what the other person is saying, instead of going off into your own head. I used to get mad at my t for talking AT ALL. Like what right did he have to talk during MY session? Thats a little different, but now it is more of a two-way conversation.

I disagree. I cannot think of anyone in normal society who will sit there in silence and just stare at a person who is obviously in distress and struggling to speak. If a distressed person clearly was having trouble speaking and tried to communicate with me in writing, I would accept that writing and read it and not refuse to deal with the communication until the other person read it out loud to me. I consider myself something of a hardass and even I would not refuse written communication.

Thinking more on this, I interviewed one therapist, who in response to my asking how she could help with my anxiety at appointments, said she would try all sorts of things and gave an example of one person with whom she sat next to and they emailed each other for months until the person could talk to her. They were in the same room and could see each other, but the client couldn't talk so they wrote until she could. She was not for me for other reasons, but this showed she was willing to work with a client who had trouble with talking to her.

Interesting. Is it about form or content? And does it switch back and forth?

Hankster, please define "it" :-) Talk/silence? And, at whom are you speaking/wondering out loud (speaking of wandering off into one's own head)?

"It" is the "this" of the thread title. And i'm posing the question to the ether. Actually to the poster just before stopdog, kinda. Not so much what stopdog posted.

Maybe I misunderstood then. I thought the T had times when she was quiet in the moment and the silence was being perceived as something very different.
I didn't understand that the T sat there continuing to be quiet while she could see she was clearly in distress. If that's the case then that is different. But Ts do often sit quietly if a client isn't talking. If that is upsetting and the client expresses this then the reasons behind that should be discussed.