Given the nature of this article, I’ve included a video satire of an overly negative character to offset the mood-killer topic of Toxic Positivity. It is not necessary to watch the video to appreciate the article (in fact, the article and the video elicit antagonistic emotions.) I include it so that the reader may appreciate that despite my brooding, more than anything I appreciate the humor inherent to life. Actually…just watch it. It’s funny.

Inspirational credit to my good friend Linda who recently introduced me to Debbie Downer:

Debbie Downer: Disney World – SNL

With that out of the way…let’s define “Toxic Positivity” or the attitude that we should always fly emotionally high…hence, the Icarus reference. 

TOXIC POSITIVITY

Provided are a few definitions of “Toxic Positivity” relayed by professionals in the mental health world given in articles or interviews intended for the general public.     

 

Jamie S. Zuckerman, PsyD, in private practice outside Philadelphia

Toxic positivity, at its core, is an avoidance strategy used to push away and invalidate any internal discomfort.

Toxic positivity is the assumption, either by one’s self or others, that despite a person’s emotional pain or difficult situation, they should only have a positive mindset

‘Toxic Positivity’ is Real — And It’s a Big Problem During the Pandemic

 

Samara Quintero, LMFT, CHT and Jamie Long, PsyD, THE PSYCHOLOGY GROUP, Ft. Lauderdale

Toxic Positivity – The overgeneralization of a happy, optimistic state that results in the denial, minimization, and invalidation of the authentic human emotional experience.

Toxic Positivity: The Dark Side of Positive Vibes September 15, 2019

 

Dr. Shannon Curry, PsyD, director of the Curry Psychology Group in Orange County, California.

Toxic positivity is extremely harmful to the well-being of children. It prevents them from building true resiliency in that they are taught that it’s not OK to experience an unpleasant emotion, let alone to have a mental illness that causes difficulties with depression or anxiety. It yields shame, rather than providing effective tools to manage stress, to improve coping and to get real help.

Toxic positivity: Why being too positive can be bad for kids

 

Limitations of Toxic Positivity

Because most people don’t even know what toxic positivity is, it follows they’d have a hard time identifying it for the integral part it plays in Western (especially American) culture. I’ll detail several limitations that occur when a culture at large embraces a purely positive paradigm. Even greater than those previously written, I anticipate this post to cause discomfort in the reader. Because my own religious history is based in the LDS church, my personal experiences often refer to moments I’ve had in its particular culture. The reader should understand that my intention is not to “pick on” or “single-out” my own religion. Quite the opposite, my intent is actually to help the overwhelming majority of my church, leadership and lay-member alike, to better understand and optimize the value of those of us who have markedly different experiences with God. Having studied mental health disparities extensively, I know that similar well-intended, yet broken, idealism exists in nearly all cultures. My hope is that the examples of my own religious culture will translate to other groups that also under-represent the realism of dimensionally different minds.

 

Limitation 1: Creation of a GAP of Expectation

Disappointment is the difference between expectations and reality. Or, as Dennis Prager wisely simplifies…U = I – R (Unhappiness = Image – Reality. (Great 5 minute video linked here)

Happiness Equation: U = I – R

Expectations/Images are integral to a religious people…and to a forward thinking people in general. Absent expectations, life has no purpose and effort is aimless. But the necessity of expectation creates a point of exploitation. Entities (teachers/school, church leaders/religions, salesmen/corporations) which develop expectations in others, whether for services, goods, religion, etc., have a moral responsibility to be forthright as reasonably possible. Yet oftentimes those entrusted with this role misrepresent their offerings. Whether out of innocence or intent the result to the consumer is the same: disappointment. And depending on the importance of the good provided in its particular sphere, disappointment can have deadly consequences, whether it be physical or spiritual. 

1. Elder Jeffrey R. Holland (Apostle for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) – Spring 1998 – “Are we really nurturing our youth and our new members in a way that will sustain them when the stresses of life appear? Or are we giving them a kind of theological Twinkie – spiritually empty calories.” Holland then quotes Elder Boyd K. Packer (LDS apostle) who taught about a year of severe winter where “a goodly number of deer had died of starvation while their stomachs were full of hay. In an honest effort to assist, agencies had supplied the superficial when the substantial was what had been needed. Regrettably they had fed the deer but they had not nourished them.”DEAD DEER QUESTIONS of my own: questions applied to the deers, but intended to be symbolic of Christian Leaders feeding their own flocks. 
   1. Of the deer that had died with full stomachs, what would have been their sense of hunger previous to dying?
   2. Of the agencies, did their rush to good intention prevent them from proper education?
   3. In a similar future winter circumstance, what action would these agencies take. If a change was made so that only half the amount of deer died the second year would these agencies consider it a success and not pursue any further improved methods of feed?

   MY PERSONAL GAP OF EXPECTATION

   Before serving an LDS mission, I had given ample personal study to the scriptures and material that I would be assigned to teach. In addition to my efforts, I had been buoyed up with the culture of Mormon missionary work. Through all of my teenage years I listened to many young men I respected (including two older brothers) returning from missions reporting their service was the best two years of their life (or at least there was never a concession that they WERE NOT the best two years of their life.)

    With confidence in my preparation and confidence in the many 1st hand reports of those I respected, I entered the mission anticipating an experience that would require significant effort and responsibility then accompanied by a more than compensatory spiritual and emotional payoff. The actual experience was more a test of my resolve in the face of depression, anxiety, and exhaustion while working with a bunch of misfit 20 year olds, myself included. Now given, my mental health was compromised compared to the average missionary. However, I was part of a significant percentage of missionaries that were compromised emotionally. The culture of mission life (at the time) did not take our needs into consideration, tagging us as comparatively unmotivated, unproductive, sub-par missionaries. Worst of all, the lack of joy and spirit we experienced represented to many other missionaries and mission leaders our diminished worth as servants of God. One such missionary with whom I worked daily with for several months had become overwhelmed with missionary life. The mission was not as he expected and he experienced passive-aggressive ridicule from other missionaries because of his struggle. One evening he told me he desired to leave the mission and return home. When I asked him what was preventing him from doing so he said if he did he would be shunned for not completing his two year assignment. Aware of his own emotional fragility, he anticipated such social stress would cause him to kill himself, informing me of the exact location from where he would jump to his death.    

   The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has taken great strides to address these complex issues of their missionaries since I served (1997-1999.) Because of the unique situation in which LDS missionaries exist culturally and socially, to properly address their emotional needs requires research. One research paper out of Brigham Young University, the LDS Church’s academic arm, shows the interest in trying to understand the complex spectrum of missionary emotional needs. 

   Return with Trauma: Understanding the Experiences of Early Returned Missionaries

   This paper addresses a variety of influences that affect the stress of young men and women who undertake such a unique assignment, many stressors of which are rarely discussed in mission-preparation culture of the LDS church. I appreciate those who recognized the need for such research, especially considering the profound effect that one’s missionary experience has on their future relationship with God.   

   I recommend anyone planning on serving an LDS mission, their parents, and their church leaders to read it. Here are a few excerpts:

   1. A person’s mental health may be affected…if preparation for a transition is inadequate, if there is discontinuity between the roles, if there is too much change in too little time, or if those transitioning experience culture shock or role shock service—discrepancies between a person’s expectations and the realities of their new environments and responsibilities (Sellars, 1971).
   2. Thomas and Thomas (1990) also considered the effects of stress on mental health during the missionary experience in terms of stress response theory. Drawing on their own experiences leading an LDS mission in England from 1982 to 1985, as well as input from mental health professionals and other mission presidents, the authors suggested several stressors associated with serving a mission, including frequent changes in location, associations, responsibilities, and expectations; gaps between ideals and realities; diversity of mission administration and priorities; enforced moratorium on sexual expression; mission traditions of motivation by competition, reward, embarrassment, and guilt; and difficulties adjusting to post-mission life.

 

Limitation 2: Inability to See and Hear things as they really are. The Overconfidence Effect.

1. A great disadvantage of a perpetual positive outlook is that one loses the ability to evaluate information in a realistic fashion. Wishfully thinking that the powers of positive thinking can overcome obstacles not fully understood may create a dangerous overconfidence that can overshadow constructive thought and action. 
2. Illusory Superiority – this is the social psychological term for a general bias people have for overestimating positive traits when evaluating themselves. This explains the phenomenon that occurs when an overwhelming majority of a population consider themselves of above average intelligence. A fascinating study in 2016 shows that such self-inflation is particularly present when people analyze themselves on a moral dimension. The research paper is titled The Illusion of Moral Superiority, by Authors Ben M. Tappin and Ryan T. McKay. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1948550616673878
3. As I’ve referenced before, on September 30, 1938, Neville Chamberlain, the then British Prime Minister signed the Munich agreement with Adolf Hitler which consented to Germany taking over a good portion of Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain would promote the agreement as an accomplishment of “Peace for Our Time.” This instigated the resignation of Duff Cooper, Chamberlain’s Lord of the Admiralty and a member of his cabinet. In his resignation speech (Oct 3, 1938), Cooper stated the following:

That is the deep difference between the Prime Minister and myself throughout these days. The Prime Minister has believed in addressing Herr Hitler through the language of sweet reasonableness. I have believed that he was more open to the language of the mailed fist. I am glad so many people think that sweet reasonableness has prevailed, but what actually did it accomplish?

…There is another aspect of this joint declaration. After all, what does it say? That Great Britain and Germany will not go to war in future and that everything will be settled by negotiation. Was it ever our intention to go to war? Was it ever our intention not to settle things by communication and counsel? There is a danger. We must remember that this is not all that we are left with as the result of what has happened during the last few weeks. We are left, and we must all acknowledge it, with a loss of esteem on the part of countries that trusted us.

Cooper’s speech was followed up the following day by a letter printed in the Manchester Guardian by F.L. Lucas of King’s College. He stated

“…to forget, so utterly, the Reichstag fire, and the occupation of the Rhineland, and June 30, 1934, and the fall of Austria! We have lost the courage to see things as they are.

… This is the really unpardonable thing in the conduct of Mr. Chamberlain. Even if what he did were the right thing to do, this was not the way to do it. Any really great man who had felt forced to sacrifice a small nation that trusted in him would at least have returned full of anguish and of shame. But Mr. Chamberlain, though he had good intentions, has no finer sense of honour. He lent himself with complacency to the shrieking adulation of a London that had lost all dignity, without one thought for the agony of Prague.”

A month later, the following occurred in Germany:

Kristallnacht – Night of November 9-10, 1938. Kristallnacht was the greatest pogrom on Jewish people in Germany up to it’s date. It marked a change from previously non-violent repressive acts to  destruction of property and life that eventually graduated to the Nazi’s Final Solution.

1. My own experience with a church leader: Six months into my experience as a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I met with my mission president for my monthly personal interview. Being aware of my history of depression before my mission, the mission president asked me how I was doing emotionally. I responded that I was struggling to feel joy and happiness, a common symptom of depression that I experienced even before my mission. 

He responded to me, with intentions to motivate, that there were ONLY two reasons a missionary would not feel joy or happiness. 

1. That missionary was not obeying the commandments of God
2. That missionary was not obedient to the rules of the mission. 

On its face, his statement was narrow-minded in the least.  I knew of many missionaries far less obedient to mission rules than myself who were having a much happier experience. Likewise, it would be obtuse to think that sorrow in life, even mission life, was exclusive to disobedience. Yet, because this was my prophet-sustained Priesthood Leader addressing me in the context of my own emotional inadequacies as God’s servant I felt obligated to consider the mission president’s words inspired.

 

Limitation 3: Over-Emphasis of Kindness, Conformity and Comfort in Current Circumstances

This is a classic case of TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING. In overplaying these virtues we unintentionally diminish development of Courage, Growth and Experience. 

Consider the story of Cinderella: A theme of Kindness as the Highest Virtue

1. 1. 1. 1. Following the death of his first wife, the mother of his only child, a nobleman marries another woman who has two daughters of her own. (A realistic plausible life situation.) 
         2. After the marriage, the stepmother moves her stepdaughter, Ella, into the attic space and assigns her all household chores. Ella’s father, out of fear of his new wife, does not protest on behalf of Ella. Ella follow’s her father’s example. She is nicknamed Cinderella for sitting next to the fireplace each evening.
         3. The nobleman dies, leaving Ella solely under the care of her stepmother. The stepmother and stepsisters continue their mistreatment of Cinderella.   
         4. As before her father’s death, Cinderella does not stand up for herself to her captors (again, Kindness at all Cost.)
         5. Her unquestionable submission enables the household’s corruption.  (SEE LIMITATION 4)
         6. In an attempt to deliver herself, the corrupt sabotage her work. The sabotage is camouflaged as wholly acceptable and reasonable behavior in the household. (PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVEness – SEE LIMITATION 7)
         7. She mourns. Question: If she doesn’t mourn at this point, is any forthcoming intervention necessary? 
         8. A super-natural Goddess appears and provides Cinderella with all she needs by enchantment. This includes specific instructions on the limits of enchantment. 
         9. She attends a ball put on by the local royalty. She meets the Prince. Immersed in this decadent new world, she forgets/neglects the enchantment’s limitations.
         10. She also neglects to communicate any pertinent information that might help her beyond the enchantment. 
         11. By no intention of her own, her glass slipper (the modern day equivalent of a fingerprint or DNA sample) is left behind. 
         12. The kingdom’s CSI unit is given a problem. They solve it. Their exhaustive, kingdom-encompassing work results in kind-hearted Cinderella living as a queen forever-after (based wholly on the prince’s attraction to her during a few hours’ time.)  

 

QUESTIONS ABOUT CINDERELLA

1. WHAT LESSONS OR SKILLS HAS CINDERELLA OBTAINED FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE END OF HER STORY?
2.  WHO IS THE HERO?…Cinderella?…the Fairy Godmother? …the Prince?…Kingdom CSI
3. Imagine a modern-day Cinderella placed into today’s servitude of human trafficking. SHOULD SHE BE UNQUESTIONABLY KIND AND COMPLIANT TO HER CAPTORS? IF a prince were to rescue our modern-day Ella under similar circumstances, would it not, in reality, be a lateral move, trading one position of servitude for another?….Can you imagine what a sequel to the 90’s motion picture Pretty Woman would look like?

Limitation 4: EASILY CONNED, BUT ALWAYS KIND.

Intentional Innocence creates vulnerable targets for manipulation and coercion.   

1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. Ferris Bueller: “They bought it.”
               2. Mr. Rooney: “Wake up and smell the coffee  Mrs. Bueller. It’s a fool’s paradise. He is just leading you down the primrose path.”
               3. The KIND BLIND:  “I’d rather have a leader that’s kind than one that’s right.” This principle directly contradicts the Divine order of the first and second commandments. God is always RIGHT. NOT always KIND. 
               4. 2nd Presidential Debate: Candy Crowley Fact Checks Mitt Romney on Libya Attack, Oct. 16, 2012. This is an example of a leader trying to state something RIGHT, but for fear of appearing uncooperative, folds to the pressure placed on him by those who would not have the narrative appropriately discussed.  

 

Limitation 5: Eternal Optimists make Poor Companions to the Pained (or the emotionally conservative.)

1.  “Some men lost all hope, but it was the incorrigible optimists who were the most irritating companions.” Victor Frankl (Neurologist, Psychiatrist, Author, Holocaust Survivor) describing social interaction between WWII concentration camp prisoners in his worldwide bestseller Man’s Search for Meaning.
2. Cultured and conditioned Optimist (strangely also, a medical doctor) to my mother after the death of my 15 month-old sister: Well it’s a good thing it was your baby and not one of your older children. That way you don’t have as many memories to make you feel as bad.
3. Ron Swanson (my personal hero) of the Parks and Rec. television series  
   via GIPHY
4. But, also, who doesn’t love Bob Ross and his endless optimism:
   

And More Ron Swanson for those unfamiliar…

The YouTube link is having issues so just YouTube the following:

Ron Swanson’s Best Moments (Supercut) – Parks and Recreation

Limitation 6: Diminishing the depth of darkness or struggle minimizes the faith and strength of those who endured such events. 

1. “Everybody has a horse to saddle” or “If we were all to put our problems on the table to choose from, we would pick our own problems back up.” In reality, these are statements made to comfort the person who chooses to say them, and convince those around him of the same fallacy. They are not statements based in comparative reality. 
2. Imagine saying these things to the spouse or a child of one who has committed suicide. 
3. Do such statements seem justified when considering the life of a high functioning, emotionally volatile mentally handicapped individual? (I know one very well. His human experience is wholly underestimated to EVERYONE around him.) 
4. Moses was asked to initiate warfare that drastically harmed the entire civilian population of Egypt. He was also asked by God (and Joshua following Moses) to lead the Children of Israel in the destruction of a people, the Canaanites, with whom he (Moses) was unfamiliar. The purpose for such being that they might occupy the Canaanites’ land. Now regardless of God’s command, these are morally heart-wrenching requirements. That being established, consider your conceived character of Moses.

QUESTIONS ABOUT MOSES

1. Is he a good individual?
2. Is he kind?
3. Is he righteous?
4. Does the enactment of these destructive acts require from Moses a simple, good-hearted faith…an instant submissiveness absent any internal conflict?
5. If Moses lived now and was asked to do what he did in today’s world – would he experience any internal resistance to God’s will?  If so, is that resistance to God’s will excusable? If not, is Moses one you want leading you spiritually AND militarily?

 

This is a morally complex question (one I never felt compelled to conceive until I questioned the eternal worth of my own mortal life.) But I believe it is an important one to ask…not to expose something corrupt…but the opposite…TO REVEAL CHARACTER THROUGH CONFLICT.

This is a topic to which I intend to commit a full article. But until then let it be said – we diminish the character of great individuals when we place conflicted acts in a vacuum of optimism.      

 

Limitation 7 – A Culture of Half-Truths

A society that is forced to call things they are not without the liberty of opposing discussion is a totalitarian society. 

A society, free of speech, that struggles to call things as they are for fear of conflict is an embryo of the first. 

Many cultures admonish kindness over candor. The benefit being that contention is minimized. However, in an attempt to avoid contention, many over-achieve, not only eliminating contention but CONSTRUCTIVE CONFLICT also. This EASIER path then drives the adoption of  more subtle, less constructive paths to dispose of life’s innate social turmoils. 

Meet the passive-aggressive culture (the silent treatment being a primary tool) to which we’ve all become accustom, care of the brain of Nate Bargatze:

I love the truth of Mr. Bargatze’s perception. I think of it every time I watch a New Testament video short in Sunday School. A few verses out of the “blessed” Beatitudes, a voiceover of Christ emphasizing the second great commandment, and a few short video clips of Christ performing miracles. 

Then, suddenly and inexplicably, this kind-hearted healer is arrested, tortured, and nailed to a cross. 

The disconnect between these two portions of Christ’s life as portrayed in these shorts is as glaring to me as is Nate Bargatze’s silent treatment perception in the Sixth Sense. For me (a faithful believer in Jesus Christ) and for likely any non-Christian who might stumble upon them, such Christ portrayals blatantly eliminate key pieces of information. Because they basically show this…

(Israelite 1) – Hey Ted, come over here and listen to this guy. He is REALLY nice. 

(Israelite 2) – You know what, Bill, you’re right. He is nice. And SUPER helpful to the physically and spiritually lame…..

(1 and 2, nodding together) – ……Let’s kill him!!!

 

Such limited portrayals would lead a religious rookie to believe that Jesus was crucified because he was KIND. And, as perfectly kind as Christ was, THIS IS NOT TRUE. 

The TRUTH we struggle to acknowledge is that Christ was crucified because He was COURAGEOUS in the face of social and spiritual conflict!!!

This was an overwhelming and consistent part of  Christ’s character. Here are a few examples of Courage and Conflict in which Christ was the instigator: 

1. Willing to horrify his parents at the age of 12 for the cause of greater good. Joseph, mouth agape, when he realizes he hasn’t seen Jesus for days while trekking home from Jerusalem: “That’s it…I’m the worst person in holy history…I have lost the Son of God.”
2. Gets the very popular but controversial John the Baptist to publicly baptize him and promote his cause. (See Matthew 3 to appreciate John’s public demeanor.)
3. Exercises and exposes his supernatural power through healings, raisings of the dead, and miracles involving food. Basically showing, and also verbalizing, his exceptionalism. 
4. Has the audacity to accuse local religious leaders of evil heartedness – merely for their thoughts, of which only Christ could perceive. Among a gathering in his own city, Christ forgave a palsied man his sins.  Without audible provoke – Christ accuses “certain of the scribes” present of thinking “evil in [their] hearts.” As a bystander to this exchange. would you think Christ contentious…using his divine powers to further embarrass these scribes by healing the cripple right in front of them – the scribes having not said a word. 
5. Establishing that turnabout is fair play when sinful accusations of a woman are cast by the corrupt. Go ahead…cast the first stone…I dare ya. Note here: his kindness to the accurately accused woman is a secondary virtue activated by a primary courage to engage in a socially complex conflict for the purpose of achieving what was RIGHT. (John 8:2-11)
6. Publicly calling influential leaders unflattering names: hypocrites, vipers, whited sepulchres, etc. 
7. John 8:58: Committing one of the most culturally blasphemous crimes by not only verbalizing the most sacred name of God in public, I AM, but also referring to himself as that I AM. Christ absolutely knew he was being antagonistic here – as he was throughout this whole exchange – proving so when he actively hid from being stoned. Jesus is RIGHT to say he is I AM, but is definitely NOT KIND or respectful to his audience or their culture. 
8. Many more exist. Feel free to comment with some of your own.

So WHY, in today’s culture, do we minimize the primary virtue, COURAGE, that made Jesus THE CHRIST? 

Why do we, believing Jesus was wholly perfect, focus almost entirely on a secondary aspect of his character, kindness? 

Why do we justify our own FEAR of offending by wrongly citing Christ’s courageous compassion?

THE REASON – Half-truths are EASY

Easy to Say (rhetoric) 

Easy to Influence (emotionally charged) 

Easy to Modulate (manipulatable boundaries)

KINDNESS ABSENT COURAGE is the HALF-TRUTH OF OUR TIME. (this message brought to you by SOCIALIST MEDIA, VIRTUE SIGNALING, and THE PATHOLOGICAL DESIRE TO BE “LIKED”)

This is another topic which requires its own article to be properly addressed. Until then, evaluate what you consider to be kind. Does it require courage, or is it just avoiding conflict.