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! :)

Okay, I'm a big "offender" of this. I double text (and triple and quadruple text) and I can get elaborate on details making some texts sound like little novels...And now, voice memos? A whole new ball game....yikes! But also...ooooh! :) Although never my intention, I'm sure there have been a few casualties along the way as a result of me doing this. (Feel free to send me a message and lmk! ha! ) But, I've been thinking about how much meaning we assign to different texting habits. 𝗗𝗼𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 (sending another message before the person replies) often gets labeled as “desperate” or “too much.” Perhaps it can even fall under the category of anxious or insecure. But honestly? Sometimes it just means someone is engaged, excited, or had another thought (or 10, ha). Context matters. I think that we internally 'know' where the energy is coming from. 𝗟𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝘅𝘁𝘀 get a similar reputation. Some people see them as overwhelming; others see them as thoughtful and emotionally available. A long text can mean someone wants to be clear, transparent, and thorough. It can also mean they process externally. And it can also mean that they've been burnt in the past and want to be understood. Again, context matters and I think that we can recognize internally where this is coming from too. In my experience, the “best” type of communication isn’t about message length or timing rules. It’s more about clarity over mind games, consistency over intensity, directness over guessing and mutual effort over one-sided pursuit. I think that it's really important to communicate our 'go to' style so that we don't have to guess what it all means. I also think it's helpful to communicate/assess how things may land when we receive a text. Additionally, I think it's really really important to assess our whys behind what/how we're communicating and also how we're taking things in from the other person. (Why am I sending a novel right now--would it suffice to send something shorter? Is the other person more likely to be receptive if I send something shorter and if I don't double text? AND ALSO Why do I feel overwhelmed when I get a long paragraph or why do I feel anxious if a person doesn't answer for a long time or answers with a very short response? What's going on internally? Communication happens between two or more people. 𝗪𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘀𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗹𝘃𝗲𝘀 AND 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀.

"if you really loved me...." ,Don't leave me or I'll" ,"After all I've done for you..." "How can you be so selfish?" "You're the only one that can help me" "I wouldn't be like this if you'd just..." In Susan Forward's book "𝐄𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐁𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐥: 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐋𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐔𝐬𝐞 𝐅𝐞𝐚𝐫, 𝐎𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐆𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐘𝐨𝐮", one of the things that she covers are the faces of blackmail. The statements above are just a way of putting a demand on the table--but they're all different. Below are the four varieties of blackmailing. I'll do a quick overview here, but may go in depth on each one (maybe) in future posts. I would like to say that if you know me, you know that I am not someone to just bash people or demonize them. The descriptions below are based on the book's content. The descriptions are accurate but they don't take into account the factors that contribute to individuals acting in this way. The factors (reasoning/understanding) are helpful to know, but they don't excuse behaviors. There is still responsibility there. Understanding helps build empathy, but understanding does not mean enabling either. 𝗣𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗦𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗦 These individuals let us know exactly what they want and the consequences we'll face if we don't give it to them. They may express themselves aggressively or they may engage in the silent treatment, but in either case, the anger that they feel is always directed at us/someone else. "If you don't take care of the family business, I'll cut you out of the will"; "If you try to divorce me, you'll never see your kids again", "If you won't accept the overtime, you're not a team player and you can forget about a promotion" Silent treatment can be part of this--a deflection of responsibility for one's feelings onto someone else. 𝗦𝗘𝗟𝗙-𝗣𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗦𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗦 These individuals turn the threats inward, emphasizing what they'll do to themselves if they don't get their way. "If you leave me, I'll kill myself" "I won't be able to make it without you" "Don't argue with me or I'll get depressed or sick" "I can't sleep/work/function when you're not here" "Fine, I'll leave, and I'll end up in the streets" (relapse, etc)

I share a weekly newsletter with my subscribers and this week's one I think is worth thinking about, so here it is: There's a version of this I remember clearly. I had told myself I'd do something, nothing big, just a small thing I'd been meaning to start, and I didn't do it. Again. And in that moment I didn't feel guilty exactly, just... slightly less sure of myself. That feeling accumulates in a way that's easy to miss because none of the individual moments feel significant enough to take seriously. Here's what I've come to understand about confidence that changed things for me. Most of us are waiting for external proof to feel it, a result, an achievement, someone's approval, a finished thing we can point to. And that kind of confidence is fragile, because it depends entirely on things outside your control. What I've found, is that real confidence starts inside, with whether you keep the agreements you make with yourself. Your brain is tracking this quietly and consistently. Every time you do what you said you would, even something small, it registers as evidence that you're someone who follows through. Every time you don't, that registers too. Over time this becomes a felt sense of whether you can trust yourself, and that felt sense affects everything, how seriously you take your own intentions, how confidently you begin things, how much you believe that this time will actually be different. So here's something to try the next time you hesitate. When you notice yourself about to not do the thing you said you would: 1. Don't negotiate with the resistance and don't ask yourself if you feel like it.  2. Just make the action smaller until it's impossible to say no to.  Two minutes. One paragraph. One email. The size doesn't matter. The kept promise does. That's the moment self-trust is either built or quietly eroded. This week try a real commitment: choose one specific thing you will do every day for seven days. Write it down. Make it so small it almost feels too easy. And then do it, every day, without negotiating.