Episode 105: When Clients Cross the Line: Dealing with Creepers in Massage

Most massage clients understand the service they have booked. They arrive for professional care, respect the boundaries of the treatment room and appreciate the work their therapist provides.

Occasionally, someone does not.

They may ask a suggestive question before booking, repeatedly steer the conversation towards sexual topics or test how firmly a therapist will hold a boundary. Others expose themselves, touch the therapist, touch themselves or explicitly request a sexual service.

These incidents can leave a therapist feeling unsafe, angry, ashamed or uncertain about what happened. The behaviour may be obvious, but it can also develop gradually enough that the therapist questions whether they have misunderstood the situation.

In Episode 105 of the Folding Towels Podcast, David discusses these encounters from the perspective of a massage therapist who has experienced them himself. The episode is not an argument for treating every unfamiliar client as a threat. It is a practical discussion about recognising boundary-testing, responding clearly and supporting therapists after an incident.

A client’s decision to sexualise a professional treatment is not the therapist’s fault.

Recognising the difference between a bodily response and sexual behaviour

Massage involves touch, privacy, undressing and a degree of physical vulnerability. Those features can produce awkward situations without any deliberate misconduct.

An erection, for example, can occur spontaneously during a massage without sexual intent. David describes experiencing this himself as a client. A physiological response does not automatically make the person predatory, particularly when they do not draw attention to it or act upon it.

His clinic rule is blunt but practical: “If you don’t play with it, I’m okay with it.”

The response is to maintain appropriate draping, continue with the agreed treatment and avoid turning an involuntary bodily reaction into an unnecessarily humiliating event. The therapist can also change the treatment area if either person is uncomfortable.

Deliberate behaviour is different. Pulling back the towels to expose the genitals, touching oneself, touching the therapist or requesting sexual contact crosses a professional boundary. So do sexualised comments designed to test how the therapist will respond.

The distinction rests less on the body’s response than on what the client chooses to do with it.

A client may feel relaxed, cared for or emotionally connected to a therapist. Those feelings remain the client’s responsibility. They do not create permission to sexualise the session or act beyond the treatment consent that has been established.

Boundary-testing often begins before the appointment

Some inappropriate requests are explicit. Others arrive disguised as questions about treatment.

Examples from the episode include:

• “Do you do full-body massage?”
• “Are you comfortable working with an older man?”
• “Do you have any issues with body hair?”
• “I prefer to take my underwear off.”
• “I get really enthusiastic during massage. I hope you’re okay with me being vocal.”
• “Do you mind if I film the session?”
• “Can you spend all your time on my glutes and inner thighs?”

None of these questions proves, in isolation, that someone intends to behave inappropriately. A client may have a legitimate clinical concern, communicate awkwardly or be unfamiliar with massage conventions. The surrounding language, persistence and response to clarification provide more useful information.

A professional answer removes ambiguity:

“A full-body massage includes the front and back of the legs, back, neck, shoulders and arms. Is that what you’re looking for?”

Someone seeking therapeutic massage can answer that question directly. Someone testing for an unadvertised sexual service may disappear, make the request more explicit or become aggressive. Each response provides useful screening information.

Fixation on intimate areas, repeated questions about undressing, oddly sexual language, reluctance to provide a name and demands for an immediate appointment can all justify closer scrutiny. A therapist does not need to accept a booking merely because the person has stopped short of stating an improper intention.

Screening is not about proving that someone is dangerous. It is about deciding whether you are comfortable inviting that person into your treatment space.

Clear procedures reduce ambiguity

Professional boundaries are easier to enforce when they are built into ordinary clinic procedures rather than improvised after something feels wrong.

David describes using an online booking process that requires clients to provide identifying information and read the practice policies. He does not accept appointments through social media messages or informal text exchanges. A separate work number also prevents clients from gaining unrestricted access to his personal phone.

These arrangements create friction for people seeking an anonymous, immediate encounter. They also give legitimate clients a clear path into the practice.

Depending on the clinic, useful measures may include:

• requiring a full name, telephone number, email address and date of birth;
• directing all appointments through a formal booking system;
• publishing a professional conduct or non-harassment policy;
• taking a deposit or payment when the appointment is made;
• keeping business and personal contact details separate;
• recording incomplete or unusual intake information;
• declining anonymous or suspicious short-notice requests.

Clear instructions inside the clinic are equally useful. Before leaving a client to undress, the therapist can explain exactly which clothes should be removed, whether underwear should remain on, how the towel should be used and how the client should position themselves.

For example:

“I’m going to leave the room while you undress. Please remove your shirt and trousers and leave your underpants on. Unfold this towel, cover yourself and lie face down. I’ll knock before I come back in.”

This scripting removes uncertainty for clients who genuinely do not know what to do. It also prevents someone who ignores the instructions from credibly pretending that no boundary was communicated.

If the therapist returns to find the client deliberately lying uncovered and naked, the session does not have to proceed. A direct response may be:

“I gave you clear instructions, which you have ignored. Please get dressed and leave. The massage will not be going ahead.”

The episode also acknowledges that nudity is not automatically evidence of sexual intent. Some clients have practical reasons for not wearing underwear, and some treatment styles may involve full undressing with appropriate draping. Those arrangements should be discussed during the intake, while both parties are dressed, and included in the informed-consent process.

The relevant questions are whether there is a legitimate treatment reason, whether consent has been discussed and whether the therapist is willing to work under those conditions.

When the boundary moves slowly

Not every incident begins with an explicit request. Some clients gradually turn up the heat.

The first session may pass without concern. Later, the client begins commenting on the therapist’s clothing or body. They ask personal questions about relationships or living arrangements. Sexual jokes appear in the conversation. A request to work on the thigh shifts progressively higher. The therapist finds themselves wondering whether each individual comment was merely clumsy.

This gradual escalation creates uncertainty. It also tests whether the therapist will challenge the behaviour.

Possible responses include:

“I prefer to keep the conversation focused on your treatment goals.”

“That isn’t something I discuss during a session.”

“This is a professional massage service. If you are looking for something else, I can’t help you.”

These statements do not accuse the client of an intention the therapist cannot establish. They identify the professional limit and redirect the interaction.

The client’s next action helps clarify the situation. A reasonable person will usually correct course. Someone who argues, mocks the boundary, repeats the comment or pushes further has supplied enough information to end the session.

Therapists who dislike confrontation may freeze or attempt to smooth over the interaction. That response is not consent, nor does it make the therapist responsible for what follows. Fight, flight and freeze are automatic responses to perceived danger. Assertive language can be practised, but nobody should be blamed for failing to produce the perfect sentence while under stress.

Ending a session when the line has been crossed

Once the client exposes themselves deliberately, touches the therapist, touches themselves or makes an explicit sexual request, the therapist does not owe them further treatment.

The language can be short:

“I am ending the session now. Please get dressed and meet me in the hallway.”

A lengthy explanation creates room for argument. The immediate priorities are distance, safety and support.

If the therapist feels unsafe, they should leave the room and not return alone. In a shared practice, they can bring in a colleague, manager or supervisor. If working alone, leaving the premises and calling for assistance may be safer than attempting to remove the person personally.

A therapist is not required to collect payment, complete the treatment or protect the client from embarrassment before protecting themselves.

After the immediate risk has passed, the incident should be documented. Record what was said or done, when it occurred, how the session ended and who was notified. Use factual language rather than speculation about the client’s motives.

In an employed or multidisciplinary setting, the event should also be reported through the organisation’s workplace incident process. A manager who prioritises client retention over staff safety is not managing the risk properly. Clinic owners need procedures for responding to harassment, supporting the practitioner and preventing the client from booking with another staff member.

David also reflects that he now wishes he had reported his earlier encounters to police. At the time, he assumed that a complaint would go nowhere because he had not been physically injured. Later conversations led him to understand that individual reports may help establish a broader pattern of behaviour.

Whether a therapist chooses to make a report will depend on what occurred and their circumstances. They should not have to make that decision alone. A trusted colleague, manager, professional association or appropriate support service may help them consider the available options.

Firing the client does not require a debate

A client who has behaved inappropriately should not be returned to the appointment calendar.

David recommends keeping a written termination message ready so the therapist does not have to compose one while still affected by the incident. The message can be brief:

“Based on what occurred during our last session, I will no longer accept massage bookings from you.”

A slightly fuller version might say:

“During our last session, I felt uncomfortable due to the nature of your comments. I provide therapeutic massage only and require a professional and safe treatment environment. I will not be accepting further bookings from you.”

The purpose is to communicate the decision, not persuade the client to agree with it.

The client record should clearly state that no further appointments are to be accepted. Relevant administrative staff need to know this as well. In a larger clinic, relying on one practitioner to remember the person’s name leaves open the possibility that the client will simply book with someone else.

A therapist may also decide to decline a client before any appointment takes place. Discomfort does not have to meet a courtroom standard of proof. If an enquiry produces enough concern that the therapist does not feel safe proceeding, they can refuse the booking.

Occasionally, that judgement may be wrong. A poorly phrased but innocent question might trigger the therapist’s alarm. The consequence may be an annoyed prospective client. That is preferable to overriding a credible sense of danger simply to appear accommodating.

After an incident: resist the urge to blame yourself

Sexual harassment can disrupt more than one appointment. Therapists may replay the exchange, question their clothing, scrutinise how friendly they were or wonder whether their draping created an opening.

They may also consider changing the character of their practice. A warm, conversational treatment environment can suddenly feel unsafe. The therapist may want to become distant, highly clinical or guarded with every client.

Practical changes may be appropriate. A better booking process, clearer undressing instructions, stronger policies or access to another person during late appointments can reduce risk. Those changes should serve the therapist, not become punishment for someone else’s behaviour.

Being welcoming did not cause the incident. Neither did being personable, wearing the wrong shirt or failing to recognise the client’s intention early enough.

The client made the decision to cross the line.

Collegial support is especially valuable after an incident. Therapists need people who will listen without interrogating their choices or offering hindsight as if the warning signs should have been obvious. They may need help documenting the event, cancelling future appointments or deciding whether to report it.

The profession also has a collective responsibility to share relevant warnings through lawful and appropriate channels, maintain robust workplace procedures and prevent known offenders from quietly moving from one therapist to another.

Professional care does not require unlimited access

Massage therapists work closely with people. They listen, touch, respond and often create spaces in which clients feel deeply cared for. None of that removes the therapist’s right to personal safety.

A practitioner can redirect an uncomfortable conversation, refuse a request, stop a treatment, leave the room, terminate the professional relationship and seek help. They do not need to wait for the behaviour to become worse before acting.

Clear systems can reduce exposure. Rehearsed language can make a difficult response more accessible. Good records and supportive management can prevent an individual therapist from carrying the incident alone.

Most clients will never present this problem. The aim is not to turn a treatment room into a hostile or suspicious place. It is to make sure that warmth and professionalism are supported by boundaries strong enough to protect the person providing the care.

Listen to Episode 105 of the Folding Towels Podcast, When Clients Cross the Line: Dealing with Creepers in Massage, for David’s full solo discussion, personal experiences and practical scripts for handling inappropriate behaviour.