I think it’s obviously implied in the quoted paragraph that the intended audience is people who mean well with their toxic positivity but don’t understand why i

I think it’s obviously implied in the quoted paragraph that the intended audience is people who mean well with their toxic positivity but don’t understand why it’s harmful. Sure, “the worst” is too strong a claim even tempered by “sometimes”, but maybe give a little benefit of the doubt that there’s some context to frame what the article finds harmful about toxic positivity? Anyway, I don’t need to read the article to say that the alternative, if you care for someone, to toxic positivity isn’t negativity or even misguided/bad advice. A much healthier and more helpful alternative is to give space for people to feel how they feel, to be heard in their expression of those feelings, and to feel engaged in the discussion of the aspects of their problem that are challenging or hurtful. “Cheer up”, in a lot of contexts, can sound a lot like any one of the “worse” alternatives on your list. At best, it’s a reassurance to someone you know will receive it well. By default it’s an empty dismissal of real pain without any notion of how to navigate that pain to any particularly more cheery emotional state. If I’m experiencing poor mental health, my assumption hearing “cheer up” or similarly vacant positive responses is “shut up” or some variation thereof. It’s not so different if I’m in a better mental health state, it’s just less painful to hear because it’s easier to ignore.