Brené Brown’s statement on Palestine and Israel received swift criticism as lacking depth, and, in my opinion, that criticism is justified. Given her influence, it's imperative to demand more than surface-level allyship.

Brown is a researcher renowned for her vulnerability, shame, and empathy work. While her sizeable following of 15 million attests to the impact of her work, she’s not exempt from warranted criticisms and controversies. Her statement fails to engage diverse perspectives, mainly those impacted in the Middle East, and it’s a permission slip to her predominantly white female fan base to uphold the status quo.

Brown stated, “When we look away from the pain of any people, we diminish their humanity and our own.” Her premise asserts that ignoring suffering is a kind of devaluation, yet her passive reaction ironically contradicts that belief. By not taking action or showing empathy, she is essentially "looking away" from the pain she claims to recognize as important. Brown’s statement has other problems, including prioritizing white comfort over the ongoing genocidal violence. By evading direct discussions about the enduring legacy of colonial apartheid and masking systemic inequities with an array of universalist statements such as "dignity for all," "empathy for all," or "peace for all," Brown’s tendency towards comfort diminishes the gravity of humanitarian crises by re-framing them as mere "conflicts" among ostensibly equal parties. She lacks perspective in that her statement addresses the situation through the lens of October 7th, failing to recognize the historical depth of inequality and power imbalance between Palestine and Israel or even acknowledging the disproportionate impact of the last four months.

Additionally, the statement's neutrality perpetuates historical harm towards marginalized groups who need to be represented and supported against systemic oppression. This nuanced understanding is crucial; Brown’s statement overlooks it. Palestinians and Jews alike have actively advocated for a ceasefire, and we’d all be wise to remember that people should not be conflated with their governments, a point in Brown’s statement I co-sign. While proclaiming “nuance,” Brown has penned an essay curiously devoid of it and is admittedly confused about why “both sides” statements are viewed as weak.

Her oversimplified statement trivializes complex issues and disappointingly manipulates the truth of colonialism to divert attention away from those most adversely affected ―Palestinians. Her timing is odd. Her take is misguided. She finally breaks her silence, attributing her 4-month absence to the passing of her mother, which I am sympathetic to. The prolonged sound of her silence amplifies the oft-identified criticism of her stance. The ability to maintain authenticity and vulnerability while staying silent is a privilege many of us don't have. Grief is a burden we, at the margins, must shoulder alongside the weight of injustice.

Black women have voiced concern, highlighting how Brown's work is not novel and fails to resonate with us. Brown's teachings on courage and vulnerability mainly cater to middle-class white women, neglecting the unique struggles and obstacles faced by Black women in America, ultimately perpetuating white supremacy by promoting a form of courage culture that fails to address systemic racism and inequality. Her work is insidiously derived from those same Black women ―Tarana Burke, bell hooks, Dr. Jenn M. Jackson, Audre Lorde, Dr. Carey Yazeed, Patricia Hill Collins, and others― prompting ethical concerns and questions about her limited perspectives regarding race, systemic issues, and marginalized groups.

Her association with the self-help movement has drawn criticism for fostering individualism and neglecting broader social and structural factors contributing to well-being. While Brown's research methodology relies heavily on qualitative methods, some question the rigor and generalizability of her findings, suggesting that personal anecdotes may not provide a comprehensive understanding of the phenomena under study.

The underpinning issue remains the risk of reinforcing exclusionary narratives within predominantly white circles, limiting perspective, and impeding progress toward a more inclusive society.

People tend to look to their social circles for cues on responding to societal issues, a phenomenon explained by the psychological concept of social proof. According to a 2022 study, the friendship networks of Americans are predominantly white, with approximately 90% being of the same racial background. Brown, an influential figure among white women, has the ill-gotten power to sway responses on any societal issue, and her audience, even if to their own detriment, is likely to follow suit. Denise Conroy, an Executive coach, and outspoken advocate, posted her thoughts to LinkedIn, saying, “[Brown] gave me and other [white] women permission to feel sorry for ourselves using empathy and shame as a cloak, a poor me routine that never made room for anyone who doesn’t look like us.”

On one hand, I intellectually understand, though I don’t condone, the merit of taking a stance that lacks courage. Many voices that have attempted to shed light on this situation have been labeled anti-Semitic and quickly extinguished. Genuine engagement, meaningful dialogue, and a commitment to understanding the complexities of issues are imperative. As consumers of her work, we can hold her accountable and demand better. It's not enough to passively consume her content; we must actively challenge and interrogate it to ensure it reflects diverse perspectives and experiences.

"Neutrality won't save you,” author and activist Michelle Mijung Kim aptly responded to Brown’s statement. I echo this sentiment.

Self-proclaimed allies like Brown stand frozen when called to the frontlines, uncertain about the depth of their solidarity. It is this brand of white liberal feminism that Black women like myself have warned of to little avail. As a Black American, I understand the consequences of when white allies do not take a stand against injustices, and it pains me to see it happening again. Brown failed to acknowledge the power dynamics at play, and her lengthy 1,439-word statement could have carried more impact as two simple words: "ceasefire now.”

*Amira K.S. Barger, MBA, CVA, CFRE is a strategic communications & marketing counselor working at the nexus of health equity, DEI, and employee engagement to aid organizations in addressing society’s most pressing public issues. She is an Executive Vice President of DEI Advisory & Communications at a firm, and a professor at California State University - East Bay.

Brené Brown: The Illusion of Neutrality