In Erik Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development, generativity vs. stagnation typically shows up in midlife (40-65) but psychologically, it can surface anytime we start asking: "Am I contributing anything that will outlast me? Am I contributing anything beyond myself?" (vs. feeling stuck, directionless, and self-focused) I look at the different developmental stages and I feel like I'm consistenly wrestling with all the stages to some extent (just maybe the more adult version of some of them, ha). I don't see it as a bad thing, I see it as opportunities for growth. Little callings to improve, little opportunities to revisit narratives. Today, we'll just focus on the 7th Stage: 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐯𝐬. 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐆𝐄𝐍𝐄𝐑𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐈𝐓𝐘 This is the desire to create, nurture, mentor, build, or guide something beyond the self. Leaving a positive mark in the world by contributing in ways that matter beyond ourselves. A lot of people think of this as parenting, but it goes beyond that and it can include: mentoring, community involvement, creative work, service, passing on of wisdom, and investing in future generations. Psychologically, generativity is linked to 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞, life satisfaction, internal locus of control, future orietnation, and identity integration. Generativity increases when people feel competent, valued, and connected. 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐆𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 Stagnation isn't just about "not having kids" or lacking hobbies...It's a kind of self-absorption that blocks meaningful contribution. Self-centered living that's focused on comfort/status/personal gain and that have boredom/emptiness and a lack of deeper meaning associated with the activities we choose to involve ourselves in. (There are a lot of judgment type terms here but there's a reason why people don't indicate feeling fulfilled even when they've achieved the comfort/status/personal gains. Our current society very much promotes these things but unless those things are tied to something 'greater' than ourselves, it can feel empty or arbitrary). --There are more things to say about what stagnation looks like, but I'd like to focus more on how to increase generativity.

Friendly reminder about writing letters of hope today! (OR anyday!). Check out the classroom section for more info! Or check out these posts: challenge-letters-of-hope letters-of-hope-legacy-challenge-cross-community-challenge

Thought I'd do a few posts about attachment styles because I do think that these play an important part in the health of relationships and I think that it's helpful to recognize where we are/the things that contribute to our interactions with others. :) 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 Attachment theory suggests that early caregiving experiences shape our internal working models and these serve to answer two core questions: 1)Am I worthy of love and care? 2)Are other people reliable and safe? Those answers guide our emotional regulation patterns, fight/flight response, and relationship behaviors. I actually think that attachment styels, while foundationally built when young, can also be impacted later in life with different types of experiences....Someone can be securely attached but if they encounter an unsafe relationship (or a relationship where signals are mixed, where one doesn't really know where they stand with the other person )it can potentially create an environment where someone secure can all of a sudden appear more anxious/insecure because that's the appropriate response to the situation. If they stay in a situation like this long enough, it can contribute to longer term effects that will then potentially lead to a more insecure attachment. (thinking about the impact that trauma has on this as well). 𝐁𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐓𝐲𝐩𝐞 (I maaaaay do a more in depth one for each of these in the future, but here's a brief overview). 1. 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗔𝘁𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 Core belief: I am worthy. Others are dependable. Yay! Nervous system: More regulated baseline; able to tolerate distress without catastrophizing; more CURIOUS. :) Curiosity is our friend, people. :) Conflict style: Direct communication, repair-oriented., honest/transparent; ability to take risks; Psychological strength: High emotional resilience and integration of autonomy and intimacy. 2. 𝗔𝗻𝘅𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 (𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗼𝗰𝗰𝘂𝗽𝗶𝗲𝗱) 𝗔𝘁𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 Core belief: I might not be enough. I could be abandoned/rejected. Nervous system: Hyperactivated threat response (heightened sensitivity to rejection cues).

Saw this quote in another community and it was such a good reminder as it applies to soooooo many areas of life. :) "I"ll start when I'm ready" sounds responsible. Thoughtful. Maybe even wise. But often times it's more likely to be self-protection which then leads to procrastination and timidity in action. This 'waiting' for the perfect moment can actually erode self trust over time if we don't take action. And that's a disappointing feeling. We rarely feel 100% ready (but that doesn't mean that we're not ready)..Feelings, while valid, are not facts...They inform, but they don't need to drive. Motivation research shows us that action is often the thing that creates clarity and confidence (not the other way around). Growth almost always requires movement (rather than perfect preparation). Something to consider: There’s also a 𝗰𝗼𝗴𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 at play: the belief that future-you will be braver, more disciplined, or more prepared than present-you. BUT!!!! Avoidance reinforces anxiety which makes us LESS likely to engage in the behavior. This is that erosion of self trust I mentioned earlier! (Check out @Sofia Martinez 's post that very much relates to this erosion of self trust: the-agreement-you-keep-breaking-with-yourself) Sometimes “I’m not ready” is valid, but I think that we need to be honest with ourselves and identify if /when that's actually the case. (Check out @Kate Galli 's post that is related--points out to some things that may get in the way of us taking steps towards goals!!: 6-aversion-factors-that-quietly-kill-your-progress) (The video is related to how to make stress your friend. Figured it would be helpful to put us in better positions for taking on positive risks! :) )

Empowered decision making... I semi-recently finished reading 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗲𝘁 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗼𝗿𝘆 by Mel Robbins. I won't go too in depth with my thoughts on it, but I will say that throughout the book, I would just randomly pause and think about how this idea is very much related to 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹. And this, this is something that comes up A LOT with clients, with other people in life, and with myself. 𝕃𝕠𝕔𝕦𝕤 𝕠𝕗 𝕔𝕠𝕟𝕥𝕣𝕠𝕝 This is basically how we approach and how we interpret the causes of events in our lives. People with an 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 tend to believe their actions influence outcomes, while those with an 𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 attribute outcomes to luck, fate, or other people/other influences. The “Let Them Theory” aligns closely with this framework. At its core, “let them” is about relinquishing control over others’ behaviors (external factors) while taking responsibility for your own responses (internal factors)--the things that actually belong to you. Instead of attempting to control unpredictable external variables (which often leads to anxiety and rumination), we redirect our focus toward what is actually within our control: our interpretation, our behavior, and our limits. In that sense, “let them” ends up being selective control. It's not the giving up of power, it's the reallocation of power and wielding it in a way that makes sense. It's the ability to really assess the question "What's mine vs. what's theirs?" "Who is responsible for what?" This is not about blame, but rather about responsibility. This to me is an empowered stance. :) POLL: When something doesn't go as planned in your life, what's your go to response? QUESTION:Do you think “letting them” always reflects a healthy internal locus of control, or can it sometimes become avoidance disguised as acceptance? ****If you have the time, definitely take a look at the video! :)