Instagram/@simonsinek
An increasing number of people have been destroying the term “vulnerable” in an effort to associate something else with the word “available.” In his recent post, Sinek felt the word “vulnerable” had been too often used and largely equated with weakness. From the alternative side would come the view of openness as being a place of strength and courage. This idea, coming from a friend, horrified much of the public and generated all sorts of reactions and self-reflections on connection.
Advertisement
Never one to shy away from going against popular opinion, Sinek had another target set in his latest idea: vulnerability. From an episode of his podcast, “A Bit of Optimism,” you can hear his rising frustration. He said the terms were so overused now that they were losing meaning. “Rather,” he said, “so many people really equate it with weakness; that is one perception I would like to destroy.”
What then should people say to one another? Sinek called upon a friend’s suggestion to reframe the word in a powerful way. Instead of telling anyone to be vulnerable, say “Be available.” Sinek sees this as a hugely important nuance. “Make yourself available to talk about your mistakes. Show people that you are available emotionally,” he said. Availability can never be construed as passive. It is, rather, an active stance requiring courage. One who chooses to remain unavailable will, in Sinek’s opinion, merely shield behind walls and smoke screens.
Afterward, the piece shifts to Rob Lowe, whom Sinek praises for his authenticity. Then he derails the cliché: “He doesn’t take himself seriously,” a tribute that Sinek detests. “If I’m not going to take myself seriously, who the fuck is going to do that?,” he says. What he means is that what people really mean to say is “that he openly discusses his shortcomings without hiding them.”
An immediate response poured in from his followers. Most reactions were positive. The distinction between “available” or “vulnerable” was describable as a game changer by many. A user said, “I love that reframe. I have been looking for other words because I don’t like the word either. That is so inspiring.” Another wrote about the thought, “Available…what a mindset shift away from fear commonly associated with vulnerable, towards empowerment and courage.”
Others were now beginning to discuss the direct practical application. One insightful comment was, “I’m practicing being available, available to my own truth, to the present moment, and to the people I care about. Vulnerability often points to exposure, but availability points to presence. When I am available, I create space for connection without needing to defend, perform, or prove.” This particular comment really sets the stage for how the new language can shape a new attitude toward human relationships.
Still, some weren’t entirely convinced about throwing out vulnerable as a word. “I disagree, any word can have unwanted connotations. ‘Available’ doesn’t capture the fear required to truly share and therefore connect. ‘Vulnerable’ does.” The comment marked the beginning of a short discussion, with others agreeing that the problem was not the word itself, but how it was misused. Another replied, “The solution to a word being misused is not to hate the word and invent a new one. The solution is to educate the people on its proper use.”
The conversation would really drag on as one follower provided a historical context around “vulnerable.” “Vulnerable in fact has a negative meaning because derives from Latin ‘vulnera’ that means wounds, so vulnerable means that you can hit someone else and hurt him and leave a scar on his body. Unfortunately Latins were fighters…” is, I must say, an interesting piece of etymological information that may shed some light on why Sinek might want to drop the term.
Another user interjected a word of caution about liking the framing but feeling “available” needs some boundaries. “Otherwise one risks being a doormat,” she warned, pointing out that even in openness, some balance is needed. This is a great injection of practicality that illustrates his audience is not going to blindly take this and run with it, but rather they are engaging with what it means.
Advertisement
Once more, Simon Sinek has sparked another worthy conversation. By way of suggesting a simple word swap, he brings into question his audience’s main concepts of strength, courage, and connection. It is in the name of that family of concepts that either the word “available” will truly gain traction or at least provide perspective on the word “vulnerable,” and I think that itself points to humanity wanting an even share of genuine and empowering ways of relating to each other. It seems that language is always ripe for re-evaluation.
