People pleasing is the wrong way to impose control

People pleasing contains tremendous hope, but it also avoids conflict. Within this hope is a magical idea, suggesting that if one were to adapt perfectly to one’s environment, everything would “turn out all right.” Therefore, a people-pleaser tends to be personal, and blames himself entirely for his problems. Either they are not doing enough to warrant some reward or they are simply complaining too much. In both cases, they often see themselves as the problem. Several factors are linked to this trend: hardness, anxietyAn intense need for control, an equally intense need for simplicity, and a sense of excessive self-importance.

People pleasers often have difficulty making choices, from small to large. Therefore, they often find it difficult to adapt when they make mistakes. This means that they often make poor choices to manage bubbles shame From failure. One form of personalization may promote hope, whereby the people-pleaser believes he or she can work harder, while another version, which we might call essentialism, implies that the people-pleaser essentially feels like a failure, which can be devastating. So, the options seem to be: produce more or leave and feel like a failure (when they blame themselves, they usually don’t seriously consider confrontation). Hardness (i.e., He is afraid Change) makes customization more likely and vice versa. In fact, mistakes are often caused by multiple factors, so making mistakes can be based as much on poor judgment as on ignorance. How often can we know what we don’t know? But personalization makes people pleasers feel like ignorance is always their fault.

Additionally, personalization helps these individuals better manage anxiety, or the fear of being exposed as fraudsters. It makes them work harder to meet other people’s seemingly exorbitant expectations. Unfortunately, if… the environment For example, it is demanding and unsupportive, and personalization as a coping mechanism eventually breaks down. At some point, a people pleaser realizes that taking on more responsibilities is never enough. But to overcome the fear of having to consider alternative options, they often continue to try harder. Often, they wait until the anxiety is completely irreversible, which they usually prefer to direct confrontation.

In terms of managing one’s anxiety, personalization satisfies the individual’s need for control. This illusion contributes to the illusion that one dictates one’s future. While some degree of this is healthy, we need to have a relatively high level Locus of controlPersonalization makes one feel very important. It’s a way to have your cake and eat it too. A people-pleaser desires three things at once: avoid conflict, avoid having to make a difficult decision about changing environments, and indirectly but positively influence the current environment. Deep down, they have an almost uncanny sense of hope that their efforts will be recognized and rewarded. Self-importance here manifests itself in the belief that one can single-handedly change an entire culture/environment and do so without meaningful risk, simply by being good. Unfortunately, indirect and implicit appeals are often overlooked, and the silence of people-pleasers is misunderstood as comfort.

Finally, customization gives way to one’s need for simplicity. People pleasers often suffer when they become preoccupied with approval when they have to live without it; They frantically try to seize or retrieve it. Personalization is supported by the belief that those who work for it can get it if they try hard enough. We see this in policy When marginalized groups are blamed for their predicaments, which is very much the case denial Fear that one’s life or destiny is not entirely in one’s hands (in addition to being deprived of one’s privileges).

Since people pleasing, or socially prescribed PerfectionThey tend to see the world through the lens of rewards and punishments, and mistakenly believe that they can influence this system only through their stubbornness. Eventually, the person who enjoys pleasure may have to decide to stop engaging in wishful thinking. They are then left with a seemingly unbearable choice: Do I confront or leave?

Personalization is the preferred cognitive distortion it helps us avoid Disastrous and labeling (e.g., feelings of failure). When considering the above decision, we can ask ourselves what we are afraid of and why. If we get fired for asking for less responsibilities, is our resume strong enough to support us? Have we built a strong enough reputation to have a voice in our endeavors? Do others agree that we have been abused or even exploited? Can we survive and even thrive elsewhere? The cliché is that we might prefer the devil we know to the devil we don’t, and while it’s true that some environments are relatively similar anyway, the act of leaving or confronting, which is essentially self-respect, and experiencing its consequences can help alleviate the inertia and accompanying anxiety. Ultimately, we can’t know whether our choices are good or bad in the short term, but even if, say, your next romantic partner makes you unhappy, enhancing the ability to end unhealthy relationships may contribute to your well-being in the long term. Facing the unknown symbolizes growth.

Finally, people-pleasers struggle to know what they “deserve,” especially when their system appears to be failing. What makes this even more difficult is that one context may make you feel like you deserve a lot, while another may make you feel ungrateful. If you strive for absolute perfection, and believe that you need to be perfect all the time and in every place, you might think that every context defines you as you are, essentially. Fortunately, but also confusingly, few things could be further from the truth.