They’ve been making a concerted effort to pack on the PDA whenever possible amid rumours their relationship is over.
But while Sophie Monk, 37, and Stu Laundy, 45, may believe they’ve thwarted those pesky breakup rumours, body language expert Diederik Gelderman isn’t convinced.
Speaking to Daily Mail Australia, Diederik has revealed why photos of Sophie and Stu canoodling at Sydney Airport this Tuesday prove the pair already split.
‘No sign of intimacy!’ Body language expert Diederik Gelderman has revealed why photos of Sophie Monk and Stu Laundy canoodling at Sydney Airport this Tuesday prove the pair have split
‘Their hands are behind the back when they are kissing – get real! Hands behind the back often shows that someone is hiding something,’ he noted after seeing the photos.
Referring to the pair’s body language as ‘distancing behaviour’, he added: They are keeping their hands away from the other person – the person you’d really like to ‘touch’ if you liked them.
At one point, Sophie is also seen touching Stu’s mid-section.
Not so intimate after all? ‘The stomach is one of our intimate zones – but really I think she is touching his side or flank and not his stomach. That’s a relatively ‘safe’ touch zone. No sign of intimacy,’ he said
While initially she appears to place her hand on his stomach, Diederik thinks otherwise.
‘The stomach is one of our intimate zones – but really I think she is touching his side or flank and not his stomach. That’s a relatively ‘safe’ touch zone. No sign of intimacy,’ he said.
After viewing a video of Sophie and Stu speaking to photographers at the time, Diederik noted that Sophie inadvertently revealed a hint of fear.
‘She shows a fear micro-expression reaction’: After viewing a video of Sophie and Stu speaking to photographers at the time, Diederik noted that Sophie inadvertently revealed a hint of fear
‘She shows a fear micro-expression reaction when she’s asked the first question,’ he said.
‘I also detect a smirk or contempt micro-expression on her face when she’s asked more questions.’
He went on: ‘Stu is asked about whether it was worthwhile coming to the airport and he replies with a double negative – typical of deceitful behaviour.’
Not so positive? ‘Stu is asked about whether it was worthwhile coming to the airport and he replies with a double negative – typical of deceitful behaviour,’ he noted