PDF Summary:Braving the Wilderness, by Brené Brown

The desire to feel accepted by others is one of the most powerful human motivators—it often dictates how we speak and act to feel like we belong to a group. But according to researcher Brené Brown, striving for social acceptance instead of being true to ourselves breeds isolation and division by fueling the fear that we’re one misstep away from exclusion.

True belonging, she says, is the ability to express ourselves honestly. True belonging doesn’t mean finding people who accept you; rather, it means embracing the idea that being true to yourself supersedes what anyone else thinks. In this guide to Braving the Wilderness, we’ll dive deeper into what true belonging means, explain why simply being yourself can feel like venturing into uncharted wilderness, and describe Brown’s advice for achieving true belonging. We’ll also include advice from other experts on key actions related to true belonging: connecting with others and resolving conflicts productively.

(continued)...

Bonding Through Shared Hate and Using Dehumanizing Language

Another way people try and fail to feel like they belong is by bonding with others through shared hate of another group or person. However, Brown warns, a bond based on an “us versus them” mindset is superficial: It’s not built on trust or a sincere desire to cultivate a relationship, but rather on the instant gratification of what seems like connection when you’re swapping gossip or ranting about something you both despise.

(Shortform note: Although Brown says that bonding through shared hate creates a superficial connection, some psychologists assert that people form stronger connections when they’re bonding over shared dislikes compared to things both people like. Experts also suggest that milder forms of gossip serve the important social function of enforcing a group’s values. For example, if you hear someone at your office complaining about a colleague who finished the communal coffee and didn’t make a new pot, this lets you know that this is a rude thing to do in that particular office culture. However, we can infer that Brown’s analysis primarily applies to extreme instances of ongoing, shared hate, such as contempt for an entire political party.)

Besides the lack of trust in this dynamic, Brown identifies another problem with this strategy of bonding through shared hate: It often causes people to use dehumanizing language toward other people or groups, which increases violence toward those groups and fosters more fear and disconnection. This makes true belonging more difficult.

For example, using the phrase “Bible thumper” to refer to anyone religious is dehumanizing because it reduces their identity to their faith and implies that the person has extremist views. Another example of dehumanizing language is the term “social justice warrior,” which might be used to mock and trivialize liberal activists.

According to Brown, using dehumanizing language like this toward a group makes it easier for someone to harm people in that group—for example, by advocating legislation to curb another group's rights or by reacting violently to those people in public. Rather than bringing people together, shared hate results in a diminishing ability to have a respectful dialogue or relationship with anyone viewed as “other.”

(Shortform note: Some experts note that social media has played a prominent role in the rise of dehumanizing language online. They argue that the frequency of hateful language in online communities normalizes it and exposes many more people to it. Although these experts echo Brown’s sentiment that hate speech can lead to increased physical violence, they differ on proposed solutions to this problem. For example, some argue that trying to censor hate speech on major social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook has downsides—some consider censorship a threat to free speech, while others assert that it would only drive censored social media users into more radical, niche online platforms and communities.)

How Can You Achieve True Belonging?

Now that we’ve covered some of the harmful ways we strive to connect and belong, we’ll explain Brown’s advice for finding true belonging. Her strategies include the following: 1) resolve conflicts with curiosity and healthy boundaries, 2) question false dichotomies (like the “us versus them” mindset), 3) remember what unites us as humans by being present with others through euphoric and painful moments, and 4) build trust in both yourself and others. We’ll cover each of these strategies in more detail next.

Strategy 1: Resolve Conflicts With Curiosity and Healthy Boundaries

Recall that Brown says part of true belonging means speaking up with your honest opinion, even when it could create conflict. This means you must be prepared to resolve conflicts by approaching them with curiosity rather than defensiveness or hostility. If everyone could try to understand other people’s perspectives and talk through conflicts with kindness, Brown says, people would feel more comfortable being their true selves because they wouldn’t be afraid of a negative reaction.

In other words, having a safe space to disagree facilitates true belonging. Even a more neutral stance, like “Since we disagree on this topic, let’s not talk about it,” hinders connection and true belonging because you might feel like you have to suppress your opinions to avoid conflict.

For example, in the earlier scenario of friends who disagree on climate change policies, Brown might recommend that the friends show curiosity by asking each other questions about why they believe the way they do: “What’s your rationale for this stance? How do you think this policy might affect people?” Brown emphasizes that this dialogue should always be respectful and should allow each person to understand the other’s intentions. In this case, the friends who disagree may have the same intention: reducing the impact of climate change in the most practical way possible. They simply have different approaches to doing so.

Brown’s conflict resolution strategy comes with a caveat: It should always be done with healthy boundaries in place. This means that you shouldn’t engage with someone if you feel physically or emotionally unsafe. For example, if someone is trying to physically threaten or intimidate you, or if they’re using dehumanizing language, this isn’t a safe space for productive conflict resolution. In this case, extract yourself from the situation rather than engaging.

The Cooperative Mindset and Healthy Boundaries During Conflict

In The Anatomy of Peace, the Arbinger Institute describes two possible mindsets during conflict—combative and cooperative—that can help illuminate Brown’s suggestion to facilitate connection and true belonging even when you disagree with others.

The cooperative mindset aligns with Brown’s concept of having curiosity about the other person’s perspective. Having this mindset means you make a conscious effort to always see others as people with needs, challenges, hopes, and fears as real and important as your own. If you think of others this way, you’ll naturally want to ask questions to genuinely understand their needs and feelings.

In contrast, when you approach a disagreement with a combative mindset, you see others as obstacles. For example, the combative mindset might lead you to speak dismissively toward someone you disagree with because you’re only focused on how their opinion made you feel bad. Similar to Brown, Arbinger asserts that maintaining a cooperative mindset is an important step toward building a strong relationship and creating a safe space to be genuine.

Even if you strive for a cooperative mindset during conflict resolution, Brown notes that healthy boundaries are also key. In Set Boundaries, Find Peace, Nedra Glover Tawwab adds that both weak boundaries and strict boundaries can be unhealthy. She says that weak boundaries make it hard for you to say no to people, meaning you might have trouble extracting yourself from a situation that feels emotionally unsafe, as Brown advises. However, you can also have boundaries that are too strict, meaning you preemptively push people away to feel safe. Therefore, strict boundaries can also inhibit the kind of interpersonal connection and true belonging that Brown advocates.

Strategy 2: Question False Dichotomies

Brown’s next piece of advice for achieving true belonging is to question false dichotomies—the types of things people might say when they have the “us versus them” mindset. For example, if someone says that you can’t consider yourself a Christian if you hold certain opinions, this assertion is a way of trying to bully you into either conforming or losing your membership in a community.

In these situations, Brown says that true belonging requires calling people out on this and adding nuance while staying respectful. In this scenario, you might point out that many Christians have different opinions, explain why you think your opinion and faith aren’t mutually exclusive, and try the conflict resolution techniques we described in the previous section.

(Shortform note: Even if you call out and question false dichotomies when you encounter them, others might not always be receptive to your perspective. In Think Again, Adam Grant notes that people often find it difficult to reconsider or interrogate their opinions and beliefs because these are closely connected to their core identity, and they may interpret pushback as a threat to that identity. Nonetheless, we can infer that Brown’s strategy is geared more toward refusing to capitulate when others question your membership in a group, rather than aiming to change other people’s minds about their beliefs.)

Strategy 3: Remember What Unites Us as Humans

Another way to foster true belonging is to increase our shared connection as humans. Brown says we can remember what unites us by being present with others during euphoric and painful moments. These include gatherings of people—especially with strangers—such as a group working together on a task (like building a house) or a large protest.

The commonality in these gatherings is a shared emotional experience: Love, grief, and everything in between are what bind us together as humans, no matter how different we may seem or how challenging it can be to relate to one another. Brown notes that in-person interactions are essential for feeling the power of a shared emotional experience because digital “gatherings” don’t quite have the same impact as being together in the same physical place.

Why Euphoric and Painful Group Experiences Bring Us Together

In The Art of Loving, Erich Fromm provides some historical context for why it’s important to prioritize the kind of group experiences that Brown describes. He writes that throughout history, societies have had ritualized gatherings that fostered intense feelings of connection. These included things like hallucinogenic drug ceremonies, group trance meditations, and even sexual orgies.

However, since these rituals are rarer in modern society, Fromm says people have turned to other ways of pursuing connection that aren’t always healthy or effective. These include things like conformity (similar to Brown’s point about trying to fit in), transactional relationships, and alcoholism and drug addiction. He clarifies that ritualized use of hallucinogenic drugs helped people feel connected with the entire community, whereas individual use of drugs—often used to temporarily numb painful emotions—can lead to addiction, increased isolation, and shame.

In Bittersweet, Susan Cain also explains why even painful experiences make us feel deeply connected to others. She writes that sadness is a prosocial emotion, meaning it engenders compassion and empathy for other people. When we see someone who’s sad, we feel sad too, and we want to make it better. Since sadness inspires us to care for others, it deepens our bonds. This helps explain why events like protests or funerals encourage true belonging by reminding us of our shared humanity. If we’re feeling more compassionate and connected, we’re more likely to be able to share our true selves without fear of rejection and to accept our differences without lashing out.

Strategy 4: Build Trust

Building trust is another key way to achieve true belonging. Brown says that trusting yourself as well as others will help you express your true self and avoid withdrawing into yourself or lashing out at others out of fear. Her definition of trust has several elements. To understand what building trust looks like in practice, we’ll explain each of these elements using Brown’s acronym BRAVING:

Boundaries: When you trust yourself, you know when to draw the line at physical and emotional safety during a disagreement. When you trust other people’s boundaries, you know that they’ll do the same.

Reliability: When you’re reliable, people can trust that you’ll always be honest and won’t pretend to conform for ease. They know that you always show up as your authentic self. People should also be able to trust that you’re reliable because you don’t present them with false dichotomies.

Accountability: If you’re trustworthy, you take accountability when you mess up by not being authentic or not engaging in conflict resolution in good faith. In those cases, you show accountability by apologizing and trying again.

Vault: You keep things confidential when you say you will—even if you’re tempted to connect with people through gossip or shared contempt.

Integrity: When you have integrity, you always live out your values, even when it’s more challenging than conforming. This is an important part of calling out false dichotomies and being honest with others.

Nonjudgment: In order for people to trust you with their truth, you have to listen to them without judgment. Likewise, to trust yourself, you have be nonjudgmental toward yourself even when you feel different or “othered.”

Generosity: When people trust you, they know that when you ask more questions to understand their perspective, you’re assuming generous (good) intentions and you’re approaching the conversation with kindness.

Examining Brown’s Signature Acronym

Brown first described her acronym BRAVING in her video “The Anatomy of Trust” on Oprah Winfrey’s SuperSoul Sessions. Since then, Brown has included the concept in multiple books, applying the multifaceted definition of trust to different areas of her research, such as leadership, vulnerability, and overcoming shame. For example, in Dare to Lead, she asserts that trust is essential for leaders and organizations, as it allows people to feel comfortable trying new ideas and relying on others. Likewise, in Rising Strong, she presents BRAVING as a helpful tool to recover from emotional setbacks and embrace your authentic self.

BRAVING seems to be widely applicable, whether in relationships or in a business context, because it encompasses several small behaviors and actions that make it easier to understand how you might improve (or worsen) trust—a concept that can seem nebulous. While other definitions of trust tend to center around reliability and truthfulness, BRAVING includes traits that are less often associated with trust but still affect it.

For example, you may have a general feeling that you don’t feel comfortable being yourself around someone, and Brown would likely classify this as a trust issue, while others might consider it unrelated to trust. The BRAVING acronym enables you to break down the feeling of discomfort into the other person’s concrete actions that made you distrust them. For instance, the other person might tend to judge you when you’re being honest with them, so you don’t feel like you can be open.