Body Language Project

Amusing Body Language For The Park: How To Build, Maintain And Protect Your Personal Space In Crowded Public Areas

Amusing Body Language For The Park: How To Build, Maintain And Protect Your Personal Space In Crowded Public Areas

Christopher Philip

This was a year of amusement parks for me and my wife, which gave me a chance to practice some body language techniques first hand.  We hit a local thrill ride park then we were off to visit Disney World and Universal Studios.  Needless to say, we spent a lot of time in line-ups and in close proximity to other people.

Throughout the adventure I had the chance to develop some strategies to maintain a greater than average level of personal space which is, as we know, at a premium in all crowded areas.  These techniques aren’t simply useful in amusement parks though, they work equally as well in an elevator, a busy street or in the mall.  Use these tips to maintain space and protect your sanity!

1) Use your elbows! This is a cue designed in light of our more portly cousins whom naturally take up more space.  Our elbows are also sharp and when we place our hands on our hips, it creates an open air buffer around our bodies sending daggers into anyone that invades our newly defended territory.  This also helps protect our kidneys and other sensitive areas from others.

2) Stand sideways. The normal way that most people cue is in single file facing the objective.  This can present some interesting situations to say the least.  It opens up hip to hip contact, or worse genital to rear-end contact!  It also can leave women open to unwanted accidental contact.  We’ve all seen or experienced this contact ourselves so it’s not necessary to say that it needs to be avoided.  What’s worse is that it doesn’t always happen by mistake.  I’m protective and aware of my personal space and that of those in my company so I am careful to notify them of persons getting too close.  Standing sideways eliminates stranger’s ability to ‘bump’ and ‘grind’ and moves your senses into a position whereby you can make eye contact if necessary.  Facing forward, on the other hand, opens up your backside to attack because you aren’t able to monitor what is going on.

3) Using barriers and cul-de-sacs. It strikes me as odd that most people don’t use their environment to its fullest potential.  When in cue there are often areas where space is in abundance, yet people still line up like cattle.  When a line forms a bend or even a ninety degree bend, there exists an excellent place to camp out until the line begins to move again.  I suppose most people are focused on their goal which is to get as close to the front as possible, however ducking out to the side rarely permits others from jumping ahead since our culture prohibits cutting.  If you can rest on a barrier or rail then do so.   This will turn your body sideways in relation to the cue and will create space in front of you.  Our culture prohibits others from moving into this space because it nears them to cue jumping so in most cases they will remain behind you leaving a large amount of space to your front.  After-all, it is the distance from the goal that determines the order so to level that distance is nearing someone to cue jump.  The barrier that you lean against also protects you and turns you into an un-movable object.

4) Use walls, refuse bins and rails to your advantage. We’ve all been irritate by the group of people in front of us that suddenly stops dead to begin a conversation, or conversely, by those bumping into us as we try to orient ourselves in a crowd.  To avoid aggravating others and find space to catch up with your company, simply duck behind the flow of traffic into an eddy.  The flow of a park traffic is similar to that of water and when water has to travel around a rock or obstruction, there is a dead area behind it where the water slows.  Ducking behind a pole or against a wall is the perfect place to gather yourself and your crew and discuss whatever you need to.

5) Don’t over advance. When the line begins to move forward, be cautious about how many steps forward you take.  If you over advance you will be stuck with limited space to your front and back until the line begins to move once again.  Your forward steps are the only way you have to control space since you can’t control how closely you are approached from the rear.  Take large and slow steps and keep your body loose.  People behind you might feel annoyed and encourage you to advance further to fill in the holes but stick to your guns, filling in the space does nothing to get you to the front any sooner.  I try to keep enough space for at least one fictional person in front of me at all times.  Another technique to try is to allow the person behind you to park themselves before taking your final step.  When people move forward they take up new ground and then stop.  Once they’ve stopped it’s nearly impossible to push them backwards so allow them to plant and then you can safely take another half step forward.

6) To create more space face backwards. When you get stuck behind someone who over advances or bumps into you frequently make them feel uncomfortable by facing either sideways as mentioned before with elbows out or face them directly, and if brazen, make eye contact.  This will unsettle them and hopefully they will get the idea.  A dirty look can help as well.  I’ve always been a proponent of nonverbal correction in others as it can be very powerful and much more proper then anything said verbally.  Don’t be afraid to upset others.  They’ve upset you, so only deserve the same in exchange.

7) When cued, assess others. When my wife, sister, or any female friend is with me, I always assess those around them to make sure they aren’t in any danger.  Reading other people’s cuing habits tells me if they are up to no good as in the case of pick-pockets.  Not to alarm others, but you might be surprised to learn that some people have sticking hands and fingers, so to speak and will get their jollies by bumping up against other women.  When I feel put-off by someone, I’ll place myself in between them and my company to protect them.

8) Don’t cattle just because you were asked. If you’ve ever been to Disney World, you know that the employees will often ask you to take up all the available space around you so they can jam as many people into the attraction as possible.  This does not mean that you have to.  If they asked you to jump on the backs of the person in front of you, would you?  I doubt it, and you wouldn’t because it would be inappropriate.  Never substitute your judgment for someone else’s, especially for that of a teenager!  If you don’t want to move ahead and cram in, then don’t.  I certainly didn’t.  In fact, when asked to move ahead I simply expanded my body with my elbows out and legs further then shoulder width.  I figure that larger bodied persons can take up more space, so why can’t I.

9) How to punish people for their intrusion. Eye contact is a great way of pushing people that overstep your boundaries.  Most people avert their eyes while in public, but a straight stare will tell them you aren’t tickled by their actions and also serves to humanizes you in their eyes so they’ll be less apt to intrude on your space.  I’m also not afraid to push back with a hip or elbow if people bump or push into me, I treat them as they treat me, so they should expect some guff for their lack of respect, and that is exactly what maintaining proper distance means – respect.

10)  A side note. Be weary of people carrying bags, or extra weight!  My wife and I both notice that each were more likely to bump into us frequent and unapologetically.  Also of note is to be careful and respectful of other people’s space when in public, especially if you are visiting a foreign country.  Always follow the social norms of the natives, as it is them that set the rules, not you.  If you follow the tips and maintain personal space herein, it will lead to a better experience for everyone.

So there you have it: Top 10 ways to build, maintain and protect your personal space in crowded public areas.  Now go out there and Have Fun!

The text and images are provided to you by www.BodyLanguageProject.com and are not to be reprinted or posted without prior written consent by the author. We take our copyright seriously. If you would like to use or reprint any material on this site, please contact us with your information including the website you intend to use it on, along with all pertinent details. In most cases, we will be more than happy to oblige!

 Mail this post

See the full post...

Cellphones, text messaging, crack and glazing over: the truth about ‘multitasking’ and the nonverbal effects on real to life people

Cellphones, text messaging, crack and glazing over: the truth about ‘multitasking’ and the nonverbal effects on real to life people

Christopher Philip

I’m writing this essay after just having returned from a ’social gathering’ with ‘friends’.  I’m priming you with this warning because this important detail might be reflected in the passion with which the following words have been written, so please excuse me in advance.  The quotation marks in ’social gathering’ are to make a strong point.  The ones in ‘friends’ is motivated more so by tongue-in-cheek.  Social was the intent of the meeting and that included a few drinks, video games and unfortunately a blackberry and a cell phone.  You might be familiar with the video game, it involved instruments and a rock theme.  Most notable about the evening wasn’t the fun and drinks though, it was the use of personal devices, text messaging, breaks for phone calls and two new girlfriends.  That’s right, two of our guests had new girlfriends and the PDA served as the social brakes (read breaks) in the event.  Cell phones are the most intense digital leash, perhaps of our times, so shame on you women and the men who succumb to their powers.

We might think that technology improves our lives, frees us from desks and connects us to other people, but text messaging and cell phones is definitely one creation that in actual fact, destroys it, especially when used improperly.  Little by little, it alienates real to life bonds and creates fury in others who have actually taken time out of their schedule to show their physical presence.  Think; it takes no time to text from wherever you are, but if someone physically shrinks the distance to meet you, it’s much more significant,  meaningful and you shouldn’t take this for granted.

While this essay might sound a little like a rant about the evening, proper use of these devices is a real social problem.  At the core root is an obsession, but since my main focus and expertise deals with regards to nonverbal language and human nature, I deal with these most.

At the helm of ‘everything’ is the nature of humans.  As computers became more efficient with processing information, we fooled ourselves into thinking that our brains were capable of performing similar tasks as computers and in similar ways.  We thought we could ‘multitask’ just like our machines could.  With the help of a computer we can write a letter while our computer renders a video.  Hey, that’s two things at once, we realized!  The powers have finally permitted us to us our brains to its fullest potential, or so we thought.  Our computers can play music, or even play a video in combination (a music video!).  Add to this any task.  How about holding a web page open (I say nothing about actually surfing the page, which is entirely different), or even multiple pages?  Indeed our computers can do all of these things, but how many of these task can we focus on?  The answer, unfortunately for personal device users is only one.  That’s right, one!  Of the above listed, we can do either one of surf a website, write a text document, edit a video or listen to music.  We think listening to music is passive and it can be, but we couldn’t actively listen to music, learn the musical notes, the lyrics or offer a critic without ceasing all other activity.  Our computers can process multiple things, but only the ones we are actively focused on get any actual attention from us, the rest simply sit stagnant unchanged on our computers.  Now imagine what effect our multitasking has on real people.  While we text, do our real life inactions stagnate and remain unchanged or do we get more things done?  Perhaps we can build multiple relationships all at once and quicker, faster, stronger and better?

If you watch someone work on multiple projects, there is a clear start/stop phase when someone ceases advancing on one job, in order to advance on another.  This idea is pervasive and happens everywhere.  It’s so popular it has a name.  It’s called switch-tasking.  You can’t write a text document while talking on the phone.  For those of you with doubt, give it a try.  Call a friend and converse with them in a free flowing manner while texting another.  I doubt the conversation would last long at all and our minds would struggle to come up with words to both type and speak.  Incidentally females are better at multitasking, but this is only a side issue for our purpose and let us not forget the ability to put some tasks into autopilot like driving for example.

Our minds aren’t even equipped to passively watch the television while speaking on the phone since neither process allows us to force one task into the subconscious.  Communicating with other humans is a complicated affair and requires full attention.  If we think we can do both, in actual fact, we do neither, or perform each task poorly.  This reminds me of the futon, which tried to be a couch and a bed and did neither well.  You can probably think of other tools that perform two task poorly instead of one task well.  Unfortunately, our minds are simply not built to do more than one thing at once and what ends up suffering are our social contacts.  While we can talk on the phone if it’s our active intent, when we try to focus on the television, we see what I like to call ‘glazing over’.  We’ve seen every cell phone textor glaze over on us doing this very thing.  My point is that device users need to understand that televisions and other inanimate objects won’t feel bad if you ignore them, but real people will.

Now let’s take the example of the cell phone and blackberry where it’s necessary to perform two tasks at once.  One is to show a presence with those around you and the other is to text to someone who isn’t present.  Who suffers and why?

As we begin our text message, those whom are actually present quickly notice this ‘glazing over effect’.  The person temporarily and effectively becomes a non-person.  Eye contact stops, they lose the ability to respond, listen and even feel.  Their minds have left us in order to deal with another, and we sense this.  When they complete there message, they snap back into existence to the people around them and they attempt to catch up from their sudden departure.  We usually then hear them start up with questions ’so what was it we were talking about’ or ’sorry about that I was just talking to so and so’.  It is these cues that indicate to us our true inability to multitask.

Other times, the conversation stagnates or dies altogether as those around them are stunned by the ignorance of the vacancy presented by their company.  Imagine if I were to suddenly place my head face down on the table, close my eyes and block my ears.  Would you think I was nuts?  How would you tolerate my ignoring you?  What if I did this every ten minutes for over four hours?  At which point would you give up our friendship?  We do this every time we text on a cell phone regardless of whether or not a conversation is currently in progress.  Even checking for messages has the same effect.  It’s not only the lack of nonverbal messaging that suffers when someone texts, or places or answers a phone call, it is the importance that someone subconsciously attempts to command by forcing others to ‘wait’ for them to return from their glaze.  The command of space and time is a trait held by dominant individuals.  While a boss can stop a conversation dead to take a phone call, an employee could/should not.  He understands that the boss’ time is important and he shows this by ignoring outside distractions.  What do our friends tell us when they make us hold as they answer their phone?  It tells us that their time and needs are more important then ours and that it is reasonable that we should wait for them to return.

What effect does it have to the people around you when you glaze over suddenly?  It’s extremely off-putting as it sends a very strong nonverbal message that their task is more important than the connectivity with the people around them.  Regardless of what cell phone users think, they can’t text and be present and active with those in their immediacy at the same time.  To their company, they are left dealing with an evolutionary brain hardwiring that tells them something isn’t right.  Naturally, we code this as being less important.  Fortunate for us, our brains know that this person is glazing over to speak to someone else, as we might otherwise think that something is truly wrong with them and call for immediate medical attention in order to assist them in their non-responsiveness.  However, our conscious minds despite knowing this, still codes their signals as an insult.

So one might ask, what are the risks of ignoring a text or phone call?  What effect does someone have when a text or phone call is ignored or avoided?  Wouldn’t this extend the dismissal to another person of equal value?  To hardcore users, the answer might surprise them.  In fact, the answer is very little, since there are no nonverbal messages being sent to someone that isn’t physically present.  True, they might wonder why you haven’t answered or what you are doing, but they’ll likely come to the conclusion that you are away from your phone, the battery is dead, or your cell phone was left at home (as you should).  By the shear physical presence of being ignored while someone ‘multitasks’ leads us to code it as being shut-out.  No such messages are sent if you leave your devices at home or even ignore an incoming message.  Setting up a voice-mailbox or an out of the office auto-responder can also quickly fix this issue.  No such primers can help social encounters.  No matter what you say or do, your message will always be negatively understood by those you ignore.

The truth of the matter is that answering the phone or responding to a text has nothing at all to do with the person at the other end and their needs.  Rather it is a reward born by the end user.  There is a pay-off achieved from sending the message and this is the real reason text and phone calls are answered perpetually.  The real question therefore, lies in the reason for this need and why these people aren’t happy enough to simply be around us.  Why do they need to reach out beyond their immediate border to converse with other people?  I have no answer for this, this is person specific, but this is the dialogue that happens inside our heads as we wait for them to shake their glaze.

The text and images are provided to you by www.BodyLanguageProject.com and are not to be reprinted or posted without prior written consent by the author. We take our copyright seriously. If you would like to use or reprint any material on this site, please contact us with your information including the website you intend to use it on, along with all pertinent details. In most cases, we will be more than happy to oblige!

 Mail this post

See the full post...

Money, Power, And Prestige: The Truth About Socioeconomic Status

Money, Power, And Prestige: The Truth About Socioeconomic Status In Relation To Mate Selection Or Why Women Like Rich Dudes And Men Like Hot Chicks.

Christopher Philip

Women typically marry up in socioeconomic status (SES), sometimes marry men with equal SES and rarely marry men of lower SES. SES consists of three components: earning power/financial resources, occupational prestige, and education. In a study by Townsend conducted in 1989, no woman preferred a spouse to have lower SES or income than she did, whereas some women preferred men with equal SES. The research found that women overwhelmingly rejected the prospect of supporting their husbands (not surprisingly).

As a woman increases in SES (think Oprah), she tends to look for men who have even higher SES (Stedman?). If she is exceedingly high in SES, she will settle for a man with the same SES. However, even a woman high in SES will rarely settle for a man lower in SES. Therefore, as a man increases his SES he increases his overall chances of achieving mates, since the pool of women willing to accept him increases. Celebrities typically tend to marry each other because they have similar SES.

It has been repeatedly shown that men seek women for their outward appearances. Men look for women who appear youthful and fertile and tend to ignore other factors. Women also seek beauty in men, but they typically find these cues sexier because they lead to greater earning power. Height is one such factor, and studies show that men who are taller, tend to earn more.

A woman’s SES is determined by her individual achievements as well as her social class, that is, where and how she was brought up. Women with post-secondary education, high paying jobs, and those raised in wealthy families will expect more in terms of resources and SES from men.

As Townsend’s study relates, impressing girls was easiest with a medical degree since it is the best way to confer high SES. It contains all three of the components (earning power, occupational prestige, and education). Science also supports the notion that good looking women marry men high in SES, despite other factors such as age, appearance, and sometimes even personality. Many attractive girls line up to be Hugh Hefner’s 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th girlfriend, rather than being the first girlfriend of a poor man. I suppose the logic here is that the math works out better. Zero money undivided is still no money; whereas millions, divided by six, is plenty.

Men targeting exceedingly attractive women therefore, will be required to impress them with fantastic figures. The exception of course is youth, when girls will ignore current financial standings in favor of cues that eventually lead to earnings. Society tells us repeatedly to ignore superficial factors such as looks and monetary earnings, yet despite this pressure, men continue unabated in their quest for curves and youth. No amount of societal pressure can overcome eons of evolution. To women, men with greater earning power leads to greater resources, which in turn to a better and easier life, including less physical labor, and a greater chance of raising a family successfully.

If we deny any of these as factors, it is only due to the blinding effects society has placed upon us. No doubt, other factors are at play too, but let us not confuse them. It is true women will seek men who are funny, with great personalities, those who are social, and so forth. However, these are a measure of his ability to invest in her tying them back into the all important SES. She can’t possibly secure his funds if she can’t secure his attention. His ability to invest in her with his time and money is conveyed by him with these other positive attributes. Thus, we shouldn’t confuse these factors with the issue, but rather we should stack them on to SES to compound the factors of attraction. While not everyone is out to anchor a wealthy man or an attractive woman, we do try to reach to maximize our potential given our inherent flaws. The adage that we, in time, eventually “settle,” isn’t just a foundationless saying, but is rather a function of an unfortunate reality. Not every man will attain a ‘ten,’ and not every woman will land a high executive or an M.D. with a fat pocket book and chiseled features.

For more information on dating and attraction, especially body language, check out my E-book – The Body Language Project: Dating, Attraction and Sexual Body Language found at www.BodyLanguageProject.com

Reference

Buss D.M. and M. Barnes. 1986. Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50: 559-570.

Chase I.D. 1975. A comparison of men’s and women’s intergenerational mobility in the United States. American Psychological Review 40: 483-505.

Elder G.H. 1969. Appearance and education in marriage mobility. American
Sociological Review 34: 519-533.

Goldman N., C.F. Westoff, and C. Hammerslough. 1984. Demography of the marriage market in the United States. Population Index 50: 5-25.

Mueller C.W. and H. Pope. 1980. Divorce and female remarriage mobility: data on marriage matches after divorce on white women. Social Forces 58: 726-738.

Townsend J.M. 1989. Sex differences in sexuality among medical students: effects of increasing socioeconomic status. Archives of Sexual Behavior 16: 427-446.

The text and images are provided to you by www.BodyLanguageProject.com and are not to be reprinted or posted without prior written consent by the author. We take our copyright seriously. If you would like to use or reprint any material on this site, please contact us with your information including the website you intend to use it on, along with all pertinent details. In most cases, we will be more than happy to oblige!

 Mail this post

See the full post...

Why Tall Men Have Prettier Girlfriends

Why Tall Men Have Prettier Girlfriends: What science tells us

about height and attraction, the ceiling effect, why 6 feet tall

is the benchmark and why you should date

women shorter than

you.

Christopher Philip

It’s a fact of life. Height is just one of those things we can do very little, if anything, about, and yet it is so very important in dating and attraction. I will go through a variety of points to show you exactly how important it is and what researchers have found about the preferences women have when it comes to this quality. The end result might bring tears, but there is no sense ignoring good hard science. By acknowledging the reality of the situation, you can use your approaches on women more selectively and sparingly, you can employ lifts in your shoes or you can use one of those stretching machines! Really, there isn’t a whole lot that can be done to fix inherent height issues, but by knowing about their existence, you can modify your “game” and end up more successful in dating. Acting according to what the science says is the best way to work most efficiently. Without wasting any more time, let’s get straight into the research.

According to Hartfeil and Sprechler (1986) height is one of the most important characteristics determining overall physical attractiveness as determined by women. I doubt that any reasonable person would refute this statement. However, at the same time, one may not understand the extent of its importance. The male taller norm is the cardinal rule of dating. Gillis and Avis (1980) took information collected from bank account applications and found that only 2 couples out of 720 consisted of a pair in which the woman was taller than the man. This is an outstandingly large number. This means that you have less than a one percent chance of courting and marrying a woman who is taller than you. Having a small chance does not mean no chance at all though. Being shorter simply means that you are going to have to work harder to get a woman who is taller. Tall women are looking for the same qualities as short women after all. However, if she is taller than you, she will expect more in terms of resources and power to make up for the height difference.

In a study by Hensley (1994) women preferred a man who was 72 inches (183 cm) tall as a benchmark. The preference for the six foot tall man is overwhelming, says Hensley. In his study, consisting of 145 females, 32 percent reported this as their preferred height. Thirty-two percent is not everyone, and most certainly not the majority, so this statistic might give you hope! The 68 percent of women who don’t prefer the 6 foot tall man are also potential suitors, and must be considered. However, fundamentally there are even fewer that are suitable for you because some of these women might prefer men who are taller or even shorter than you regardless of what height you happen to be, further shrinking your pool of eligible women. Here comes the better news. In a study by Cameron (1978) it was found that 100 percent of the women advertised the desire to date a man who was 4 inches taller than themselves. Hensley’s (1994) study, mentioned above, showed that on average, women and men both prefer the man to be 2 to 3 inches taller than the woman in a relationship. Why is this news better? It’s better for the simple fact that it destroys the 6 foot tall benchmark rule. That is, men aren’t at a huge disadvantage just because they aren’t all 6 feet tall. Men simply must be taller then the women they seek. It is much easier to change your target date than it is to change your height! Furthermore, a study by Shepperd and Strathman (1989) revealed that 95 percent of the female participants preferred a taller man, 3 percent the same height and 2 percent preferred males shorter than themselves. Therefore it suggests that it is not the absolute height but rather the relative height that matters the most. Finally, we have something to work from! If we accept this information, and we should, than we also accept that you and I, and everyone else, will have a far better chance of getting what we want from a woman who is shorter than ourselves.

The text and images are provided to you by www.BodyLanguageProject.com and are not to be reprinted or posted without prior written consent by the author. We take our copyright seriously. If you would like to use or reprint any material on this site, please contact us with your information including the website you intend to use it on, along with all pertinent details. In most cases, we will be more than happy to oblige!

 Mail this post

See the full post...