It wouldn’t be if I wrote it. I’ve never seen it used unironically against anyone who wasn’t genuinely socially progressive.
And I count the way monstro is using it as ironic: she’s pointing out that the people who actually use the term “virtue signaling” are ironically doing the very thing they complain about.
It’s a real thing. The right and the left both do it. I remember when it became a widespread buzzword, and I thought to myself, “damn, that’s a good word for it” because I already knew what the concept was but I didn’t have any vocabulary to describe it other than “showing off that you’re ‘enlightened’ so that everyone can see”.
The right wing examples of virtue signalling include excessive flag-waving; putting police and military symbols all over everything; saying stuff like “God bless our troops” during a speech or whatever that otherwise has absolutely nothing to do with the military; it’s not exactly each of these things alone, in isolation, that constitute virtue-signalling, it’s forcing them into discussions or events where there’s really no reason to, just to show off that they’re part of the “right group”.
Left-wing examples of it include shoehorning racial or gender related points into stuff where there’s really no reason to do it; white people browbeating other white people for not being sufficiently “allied” to people of color or to women or to transgender people, when the people being browbeaten really didn’t do anything to deserve it and usually AGREE with the virtue-signaller in spirit but aren’t sufficiently demonstrative of it; using words like “Latinx” (yes, I think that’s virtue signalling; there’s no real reason for it) and adding additional letters to the LGBT acronym - yes, that annoys the hell out of me because “Q” for queer is simply too ambiguous and confusing for the majority of people to understand as being any different from the other acronyms, and all of the other letters that may be added to it are simply going over the vast majority of peoples’ heads, will not be recognized, and make it needlessly complicated for the sake of being “inclusive” when a simple four-letter acronym has gotten the point across properly for years.
So, yeah, that’s MY take on it. Just mine alone. Anyone else might feel differently - eh, feel however you want to feel.
I think there is a lot of “virtue signalling”, at least on the part of big businesses.
I’m pretty sure the CEO and board of directors of companies like PepsiCo don’t actually give a crap about BLM or Pride month. But I think, on average, it’s a good thing that they act like they do - because that means they’ve done the math, and decided that BLM and Pride are on the winning side of history.
Ultimately, getting society to improve is dependent upon getting enough people in society to decide they want to change. If a bit of virtue signalling on on the part of big business and big government pushes them towards making the choice to change, that’s a good thing.
It’s another right wing way to call people they call SJWs bad people.
Why would that be funny? I have never heard the criticism of “virtue signalling” directed at anyone other than someone on the left, a social progressive.
Yes, slacktivism is a type of virtue signaling.
Why do you think “virtue signaling” is something only the left does to the left?
As I posted above, Trump doing a photo OP to wave the bible is virtue signaling.
If you disagree I’d (truly) be interested to hear why.
I think virtue signalling is a real thing, however, I also think that when a person accuses another person of it, 99% of the time it is a bad faith attack to get the second person to shut up.
Lots of people and organizations try to look better than they actually are. In fact we all do. I don’t think we need a special new phrase for something that “hypocrisy” was always perfectly adequate for.
The term “virtue signaling” is a specific coinage of the right to indicate a specific kind of hypocrisy they believe they see coming from white liberals who are trying very hard to reform themselves and their language so as to not offend or insult minorities (admittedly with mixed results). They also coined “PC” and “SJW”. They all reference the rage the right wing feels around being asked to empathize with and respect people who have been marginalized. Truly, that rage has become what the right is all about. Everything that was actually conservative about them has been drowned by this rage.
I get the impression you’re inferring the meaning of “virtue signalling” from the definition of the two separate words virtue and signal. But that’s a mistake - it’s a compound word that has a meaning that must be inferred from usage, not from the sum of its parts. Just as “safe space” does not mean any kind of space that is safe in any kind of way, I think “virtue signalling” means something more specific than anyone signalling any kind of virtue.
So it’s not a question of what the left or right are capable of doing, it’s a question of usage. I could be wrong on usage, but as I say, I’ve only ever seen it applied to social progressives.
It say to me “I’m conservative and can’t fathom that someone would do something virtuous without some ulterior motive.” It’s very telling of the conservative mindset.
No, insincerity and bragging are not at all the same thing - we tend to brag about things we think are true about ourselves. Someone who is virtue signalling certainly does believe they are virtuous, it’s not a pretense.
Well, you can say that almost any kind of derogatory term is “unnecessary”. I think it sums up a certain type of behavior, and using the term does not preclude following on with making a more extensive argument.
It’s an accusation that a person is expressing a belief because they think it will make them look good to their audience rather than because they actually believe it.
It’s a way to shift an attack away from the belief and make it a personal attack. If I’m a racist, for example, and somebody wants to argue with me that racism is wrong, I can say “You’re just virtue signalling. You hate people from other races too but you just want to make yourself look good so you pretend you don’t.”
By doing so I’ve changed the argument. It’s no longer about whether racism is good or bad. I’m claiming that both of us are racist but I’m honest about it while you’re lying. And if you attempt to argue against my claim and say you honestly believe what you’re saying, I can just respond “Sure, you say that. That’s just the kind of thing a person who is virtue signalling would say.”
You can’t refute my argument verbally because I can take anything you say and claim that it’s a lie and therefore proves my accusation is correct. So when I resort to accusing you of virtue signalling, the best strategy is to stop making verbal arguments and punch me in the face. I’ll deserve it.
Ironically, that bible he was waving contains Matthew 6:1-5, which is a very specific admonition of virtue signaling.
Virtue signalling is a human universal which probably goes back to our hunter-gatherer ancestors. Conservatives do it all the time of course. In recent years virtue-signalling on the left on issues of race and gender has grown dramatically often taking a particularly obnoxious, intolerant and ridiculous form.
You shouldn’t, because the context is essential. Of course intersectionality is important, and standing up for others outside your group is vital, especially marginalized groups. And all that has absolutely nothing to do with what I’m talking about. No single behavior can be a definitive litmus test, but all the things I’ve described, taken in aggregate and in context, slowly builds a picture of a person. I have a ton of progressive friends. I can tell who is actually authentically caring and supporting others, and who is just using the cover of progressiveness to spit shine their own ego or even bully others.
Yeah, white people should strike down racist shit. But if you’re a white person calling out other people for cultural appropriation, you’re probably a phony.
Nope. I’m saying the things certain immature white people think minorities want them to care about doesn’t often resemble what they actually do.
Nope. Because the people I’m talking about don’t have arguments. They just attack other people with buzzwords and claims of offense. They clearly don’t even have a good understanding of those buzzwords. They aren’t interested in solutions. They are just about making themselves feel good at others expense, and perhaps soaking in some drama and pearl clutching.
And who is talking about opponents? These aren’t people I’m arguing with. They are a certain type of person I see turn up in any political or progressive issue online discussion. I know better than to engage with obviously inauthentic people.
I’m just saying, virtue signaling, as wretched as it is for me to concede that something that usually is thrown around by conservatives in a junior high way, does actually also refer to a real phenomenon.
Most importantly, it’s a real detriment to authentic progressive discourse.
I’m centre-right, but I totally agree with this post. I don’t mind when somebody has different beliefs than I do, or if somebody is passionate about their beliefs. But with some people, it’s not enough that they’re passionately pro-whatever or anti-whatever. They want to be seen as the most pro-whatever or anti-whatever person on the planet. It’s almost like they’re in a competition to see how frequently and flamboyantly they can display their pro-whateverism or anti-whateverism. They care more about the display than the message. At that point I ignore them because whatever well-meaning intent they may have had is dwarfed by their paroxystic spectacle.
Yup, this is exactly the real phenomenon that I think the term describes.
As noted there’s some overlap with the term slacktivism. I think there’s also some overlap with “Social Justice Warrior” - which is always used sarcastically, and which is also a term I’ve occasionally used myself as a derogatory descriptor of people who are virtue signallers.
Maybe our definitions of virtue signalling are different, but I can think of plenty of positions that I consider rightist that contain virtue signallers. Anti-abortionism, anti-gun control, and anti-immigration quickly spring to mind.
For that matter, I think there are virtual-signallers for causes that are neither left nor right. Cancer prevention/research, animal welfare and children’s welfare causes are all examples.
I’m a left-wing Bernie supporter and I see people (both left and right) virtue signalling all the time.