Why “Let Them” Isn’t a Theory, and Why That Matters | Transforma

In recent years, a simple phrase has gained outsized influence in personal development spaces: “Let them.” Popularized by Mel Robbins, it’s often presented as a kind of breakthrough - an elegant solution to overthinking, people-pleasing, and emotional entanglement.

At first glance, the appeal is obvious. The phrase feels relieving. It suggests release. It promises agency.

The problem is not that “letting them” is wrong. The problem is that it is not a theory, and treating it like one obscures what actually drives change.

Action Is Not the Same as Explanation

A theory explains mechanism. It answers questions such as:

• Why does this pattern exist?

• What maintains it?

• Under what conditions does change become possible?

• Where does this approach break down?

The “Let them Theory” does none of this.

It is an instruction. A behavioral suggestion. An action you might take after something has already shifted internally. Calling it a theory gives it conceptual weight it does not carry.

This distinction matters, because actions without explanation tend to work only for people who were already close to change.

Why the “Let Them Theory” Feels Impossible for Many People

For a large number of adults, the difficulty is not knowing what to do. It is understanding why doing it feels unsafe, costly, or destabilizing.

Not intervening, disengaging, or “letting others be” can threaten:

• Belonging

• Emotional safety

• Financial security

• Role identity (caretaker, mediator, achiever)

• Nervous-system regulation learned early in life

These are not mindset issues. They are adaptive responses shaped by real conditions. When advice skips this layer, it risks framing inability as unwillingness.

The Hidden Assumptions Behind the Phrase

“Let them” quietly assumes:

• Equal power between parties

• Minimal consequence for disengagement

• Adequate internal and external safety

• A stable sense of self independent of others’ reactions

For people who already have those conditions, the advice may feel liberating.

For people navigating dependency, hierarchy, cultural obligation, or precarity, it can feel thin - or worse, subtly blaming:

If you’re still affected, you must not be letting them.

This is a familiar pattern in highly individualistic self-help culture: the action is universalized, while the conditions required to take it are left unspoken.

Why Slogans Travel Faster Than Frameworks

Phrases like “let them” spread because they are:

• Easy to remember

• Emotionally soothing

• Immediately actionable

• Highly shareable

They offer relief without requiring examination.

But relief is not the same as resolution. When the underlying structure remains intact, people often cycle back into the same patterns - confused about why the advice “worked” briefly, if at all.

This is where many well-intentioned approaches quietly hit a ceiling.

What a More Accurate Model Would Ask Instead

A structurally sound approach would slow the moment down and ask:

• What internal rule makes this feel like my responsibility?

• When did that rule form, and what did it protect?

• What risk does disengagement represent right now?

• What has to be true, internally or externally, for “letting them” to be a real option?

Only after these questions are addressed does an action like disengagement become sustainable rather than performative.

At that point, “letting them” is no longer a forced posture. It is a byproduct of clearer orientation.

From Advice to Agency

Advice culture often jumps straight to behavior. Agency requires something deeper: accurate understanding of the forces shaping choice.

This does not mean rejecting all simple guidance. It means recognizing its proper place. Actions are most effective when they reinforce a shift that has already begun; not when they are used to manufacture one.

A Closing Reflection

Many popular ideas sound empowering because they reduce complexity. The cost of that reduction is often borne by the people for whom change is not simply a matter of deciding.

Real agency is not created by slogans. It is created by seeing, clearly and without judgment, what has been shaping us all along.