Saying things that you know will please the people you want to impress.
It's a term right-wingers use to dismiss the motives of people with whom they disagree. For instance, "I believe police should not kill innocent people" is virtue signalling because no one in their right mind would really say that.
The fact that you are unfamiliar indicates that you are not a state-news watching Trumpian. Either that or you are feigning ignorance to signal your virtue to those of us who think the police are acting unreasonably when they kill people for misdemeanors.
ETA: If it is the latter, let me compliment you on your socialist deviousness--always thinking two steps ahead of the rest of us!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/07/2020 06:23PM by Lot's Wife.
I wish I was smart enough to be a step ahead of anyone.
In fact, it seemed like the term was frequently used as a substitute for "dog whistle" or "ass kissing" (pardon my French...) but I feel like there must be some nuance that I am missing.
Is virtue signalling taken as insincerity? Is it meant to be a secret communication?
When I was an active mormon, I would have to supresss laughter when people would drop clues that they were mormon. It was like they wanted you to trust them without knowing anything else. It actually had the opposite effect on me. I find appeal to virtue based solely on group membership to be unpersuasive.
Thanks for your explanation, but I still feel like I am missing something.
I try not to judge people, but is that statement virtue signaling?
If you say you care about global warming and I reply that you are just virtue signaling, I am accusing you of mouthing the right slogans in order to please your peers. It is an accusation that you are not sincere.
Lot's Wife Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes, it is a term of derision. > > If you say you care about global warming and I > reply that you are just virtue signaling, I am > accusing you of mouthing the right slogans in > order to please your peers. It is an accusation > that you are not sincere.
A classic example of virtue signalling with global warming would be when politicians make a big noise about how bad it is, and then they all get on international flights and stay in expensive hotels in order to discuss it. That happens frequently.
It's a general phenomena whereby people feel the need to prove to others that they are "on board" with whatever cause is seen as identifying them as virtuous.
It was first brought to my attention by someone referring to bumper stickers and lapel pins.
Lot's Wife's take on the term seems to be somewhat short-sighted if not a bit paranoid.
notmonotloggein Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lot's Wife's take on the term seems to be somewhat > short-sighted if not a bit paranoid.
I'd say the same about yours. It seems you believe it is group signaling which is more Mormon.
The term originated on the right. Above I said it works both ways but then some idiot named "Not Saying" informed us that it was only applicable to the left, which I said was stupid.
I recall the pause mentioned in the article. It reminded me of the same pause that I heard in hundreds of talks by mormon general authorities, stake and ward leaders who wanted to sound sincere.
Don't get me wrong, I am not against Mitt because he reminds me of others who I no longer trust, but I am not persuaded by his theatrics either.
The article spoke of grandstanding. Is that part of virtue signaling?
elderolddog Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So... > > Is there Bad Boy Signaling?
Yes! How many times have you seen a middle class teenager try to look "gangsta"? There are also some people who praise mass murderers to look tough. It's the reverse of virtue signalling.
A group of Mormons has been seated at a restaurant table. The server hands them the drinks menu and asks, "Would anyone care for a cocktail before dinner?"
The Mormons reply, "No! We don't drink alcohol!", thus signaling their LDS virtue.
Anyone else who did not wish to imbibe would simple respond, "No, thank you."
Reminds me when I was a kid and a lot of cafes automatically poured you a cup of coffee as a starter and had cups already at your seating. Mormons turned the cups over with great fanfare.
When I was Mormon I wanted to drink but couldn't. I would say it was against my religion as if I could blame it and not my teetotalling. Ironically, they came out with a T-shirt to say the same thing the same way - I can't I'm Mormon.
If it isn't virtue signaling it could be about psychological acceptance of what you would rather be doing but Jesus won't let you.
I appreciate all of the feedback, but your example gives me some insight that I was missing.
It sounds like one who is virtue signalling is taking advantage of a situation to promote a position that could have just as easily been left alone.
As Lot's Wife mentioned, it could relate to an issue that no one might disagree with anyway. If a person wants to drink or not drink, probably no one really cares. However, the virtue signaller wants someone to know their position.
Yes. It is "look at me, I am righteous" directed at the "in" crowd.
It's like a Mormon using the right vocabulary to signal to other Mormons how virtuous she is. Or turning her coffee cup upside down at a restaurant for the same purpose.
Sub-groups, such as engineers, medical people, and distinct religious groups, have their own vocabulary. They use it with each other, so it's not unusual for it to seep into their general conversation. For example, referring to "Heavenly Father" frequently to the reduced use of the word "God."
The problem with cultic "secret language" is that often they have a hidden or unique understanding of certain words. For example, they know that their "Celestial Kingdom" is very different from Christians' concept of "Heaven," yet they use the word "Heaven" as they mean the same thing.
This is very true in Christian Science, where the word "Science" (upper case) means Mary Baker Eddy's metaphysical system, not empirical methodology which everybody else understands. In this case, I think the issue is better described as spiritual elitism, as opposed to virtue signaling.
If you look at the numbers, the uproar over unwarranted deadly force is more due to the country’s culture of risk aversion. BLM has turned out to be much worse than police for handling grievances. Many more dead from shootings. Yes, we can and should improve the numbers. I think policing will improve from this. The insane level of economic disparity driving crime gives them a difficult job which will get even harder as that disparity goes into hyperdrive as the Main Street economy crumbles.
It’s not that police culture is racist, it’s that racism doesn’t go away like magic. People can’t change the way they are. You have to get them as kids. Fix education, fix bullying, give all kids real support, and in 50 years you won’t have racist police.
The political culture in the US is designed to distract us from the real problems. It’s the best way to run a democracy as an oligarchic dictatorship. They get us all up in a tizzy over ... what? And we fall for it every time. Total sheeple. Our evolutionary biology is working against us and they know it.
“Virtue signaling” is part of the game. If your values are different from someone else’s values, you can say they are virtue signaling. Back in the day you’d just call them stupid.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/08/2020 12:57PM by bradley.
Dave the Atheist Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Virtue signaling is when you complain about virtue > signaling.
Or not. The person doing SL is pushing what they think is a popular and righteous opinion. The person complaining about it is sometimes expressing an unpopular opinion, and s/he will receive a lot of criticism for doing so.
There are many great examples of virtue signalling that we should all be aware of and that can explain what the phenomenon really is all about, here are a few: When people appologize for slavery that happened hundreds of years ago by people who lived hundreds of years after the emancipation of slaves. Then there are certain cringy moments from the news recently of certain leaders who are wearing African shawls and kneeling in pain and humility in very showy government public buildings all with a big beautiful audience adoring them. Why are they doing this? To supposedly show that they have lots of virtue and feel the pain. How about when Kimball, Joseph F Smith, and Hinckley use to wear the hawaian leath at all general conferences. Somehow they were showing how in-touch and sentimental they were with the Islanders. (It's hard to identify how exactly Smith loved the Islanders so much especially when he sent them out into the desert into the worst land he could find, to keep them away from his kind of people)
macaRomney Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are many great examples of virtue signalling > that we should all be aware of and that can > explain what the phenomenon really is all about, > here are a few: When people appologize for slavery > that happened hundreds of years ago by people who > lived hundreds of years after the emancipation of > slaves.
Really?
My ancestor created a territory of The United States as slaveholding territory as well as tacitly allowing Native Americans to be slaves for whom he was head of a religion claiming their were people his holy book was supposed to save.
And this is virtue signaling when I express my feelings of remorse for being genetically connected to him. Yet, my feelings are virtue signaling to you.
I feel sorry for you actually. Because you are looking through a lens (that broad brush stroking of your ego in brushing other people's specific points of view aside) for your own comfort.
Pretty callous and cold comfort in my opinion.
Edit: hundreds of years? Maths.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/08/2020 06:24PM by Elder Berry.
Basically it is where someone makes a big point of showing that they support the "right" causes, hold the "right" views etc, but that when they do this, it tends to be empty gesturing without real substances. A lot of corporations do this just now, but at the same time do not treat their employees properly, so it is an empty gesture.
A lot of celebrities make a big show of their charity work, but at the same time avoid tax and treat their staff badly. I find it sickening when a celebrity gets poor people to hand over money to a charity when they could easily match hundreds of such donations.
Jesus, or at least the writer of Matthew, said:
"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward."
I see this as the same phenomenon. These people wanted fame and people to like them and for people to see them.
"Virtue signalling" is supposed to be more about appearance and hypocrisy, and someone building themselves up.
Adrenalin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Virtue signalling" is supposed to be more about > appearance and hypocrisy, and someone building > themselves up.
Your definition doesn't match up to Magaromney's methinks. He accuses me of one of the most egregious examples for apologizing to an exMormon forum for my great great great grandfather's support of slavery when he ruled Utah Territory.
I still feel the same about it and feel bad to be the posterity of such a person especially in light of how many of my relations worship the man. I tell them he did wrong and they make excuses or sit mute and change the subject.
I guess to some this it is virtue signaling to feel this way and express it here because it was "hundreds" of years ago. I've lived with Brigham Young's shadow over me my whole life. It sucks.
Adrenalin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If I can put over the other side... > > Basically it is where someone makes a big point of > showing that they support the "right" causes, > hold the "right" views etc, but that when they do > this, it tends to be empty gesturing without real > substances.
Mitt Romney marching in a BLA demonstration?
> A lot of corporations do this just > now, but at the same time do not treat their > employees [(edit) i.e. 3rd World labor force] properly, so it is an empty gesture.