I first trained as a Rolfer (see Appendix I) over twenty-five years ago. I began the work filled with good intentions of bringing balance and harmony to the bodies and the lives of anyone who was willing to submit to my hands and limited knowledge. After six months, a teacher of mine, Judith Aston, reviewed the Polaroid® photos that I had taken of my clients after each session. She commented that each of my clients looked different before they started the process. Midway through, they started to look the same—compressed in the groin area. This was especially true of my male clients. I looked at myself in the mirror and saw that I was also “short” (compressed) in that part of my body.
I realized that I was afraid to touch that part of a man’s body. One fear involved the possibility of causing damage. Another fear was the possibility of the client misunderstanding my intention. Shortly after Judith’s comments, I had the opportunity to do a dissection on a male body with several other Rolfers. I paid special attention to the structure of the pelvis to find out what was safe to work on and what was not. I will admit that no one else was allowed to touch that pelvis: I wanted to be absolutely sure that nothing was cut away before I had a chance to look at it.
Structural protection in the male cannot be understood without considering possible reasons for such protection, both physical and mental. The first and most obvious consideration is the external positioning and sensitivity of the genitals. The fear of being injured in the testicles would cause a pulling in, both consciously and unconsciously. The unconscious is the most interesting since it would begin very early in the male infant.
Less obvious are effects of the moral and cultural values with which the man is raised. In the northern cultures especially, men are ashamed of their feelings. Men don’t cry. Pleasure and joy are not part of the vocabulary. Sensual is considered feminine. Erotic must be immoral. The biggest problem with these attitudes is that the messages are generally non-verbal. Such messages are hard to be conscious of, much less to rebel against. This necessitates being more aware of what a man “doesn’t say,” or listening for the little side comments that he will make from time to time about his feelings and/or his background. Such awareness can start while doing the bodywork and then spill over into the bodyworker’s personal life.
This awareness opened a pathway of observing and understanding general patterns of males’ protection of the pelvic region. This area is generally not discussed by men, who say very little about their genitals except, in some cases, to brag about their sexual prowess and, in fewer cases, about their penis size. The anus is not discussed at all. A direct question to a man about what he feels in his pelvis is usually met with embarrassed silence or a change of subject.
Doing bodywork on many men has offered me an opportunity to observe similarities and differences in the male pelvic structure. Working in the pelvic area makes clear the areas of sensitivity (don’t touch). There is a general pattern of protection both structurally and functionally in the groin region, whether the genitals hang low between the legs or are positioned more “up front.” Working around the coccyx (tailbone) usually results in a tight clamping of the entire buttocks, and some men (if they can verbalize it) complain that they feel as though their anus is being penetrated. The latter demonstrates how insensitive a man can be in the anal area and brings up the fears of anal penetration.
My concern was that my information was coming from an older generation (mainly, my own). I have noted that the protective structural restrictions are similar in the pelvis of men of various ages and cultures. My question was whether the reasons were the same. In an attempt to get input from men of different ages and cultures, I gave an outline of this text to a variety of my male clients, friends, and casual contacts and asked for reactions. The usual initial response was very little comment (frequently, “very interesting”). On later visits, more response occurred. It seemed as though they needed time and permission to be O.K. with thinking about their own pelvic area. An occasional comment was, “Men don’t talk about this.”
One of the best sources has been women, especially mothers of boys. Their openness demonstrated that they knew what was going on during their son’s early development even though the boys had no idea that their mothers were aware. Some fathers preferred to live in oblivion about their son’s maturation.
Many of my observations are intuitive and guesswork based on minimum explicit output from others. Dr. Rolf used to say that intelligent guesses are valid.