FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Virtue signalling
Virtue signalling
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've stopped looking at Facebook because it's full of people telling me of their saintly thoughts " Wicked thoughts only please ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 
Lu  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
What does that mame?!
Jo.Xx | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm a nice Cunt!
What does that *make me?!
Jo.Xx " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I deleted Facebook in 2017 when it became meme central. "Me too  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gets on my nerves. Just saying " You're allowed your opinion... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm a nice Cunt!
What does that mame?!
Jo.Xx "My kinda girl   
Lu | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I deleted Facebook in 2017 when it became meme central.
Me too "I've never been back on since. I don't miss it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm a nice Cunt!
What does that mame?!
Jo.Xx
My kinda girl
Lu "Get in!!
Jo.Xx | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
I mentioned all the good posts that I do post, as an example that people can follow. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Because being anti virtue signalling is seen as virtuous, I'll keep my opinion of it to myself " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Because being anti virtue signalling is seen as virtuous, I'll keep my opinion of it to myself "Yep I am fully aware of the irony of my thread.
I appreciate the humour in many of these replies too.
It's just that sometimes I'd like to be able to say something without people telling me that they would never do that because they are far too selfless/humble/all round good eggs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just posted a long rant on Facebook about how I hate virtual signalling.
I mentioned all the good posts that I do post, as an example that people can follow. "You are an example to us all | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How do you survive on the fora then OP? "I put my fingers in my ears and sing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think there's a very fine line to be found with it - it's usually crossed once that virtue is signalled at every given opportunity and almost shoe-horned into conversations and comments - have seen it both here and on other social media - and usually comes across that the person doing it has something to prove, not only to others, but themselves. Distinguishing between actual virtue signalling and people expressing their honest beliefs and opinions can be tricky and is probably not helped by "virtue signalling" being over used as an insult or to put down someone else's opinion. " What finally pushed me over the edge was a post by an acquaintance saying they'd seen some very reduced chocolate in a shop so had bought ten. The number of people who replied saying how selfish they were and the only reason they would buy so many would be to donate them to a worthy cause was quite astounding. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just posted a long rant on Facebook about how I hate virtual signalling.
I mentioned all the good posts that I do post, as an example that people can follow. "Such altruism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal "Neither do I. I don't have time with my 20 hour shift at the sanctuary for abandoned baby animals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal
Neither do I. I don't have time with my 20 hour shift at the sanctuary for abandoned baby animals. "Bloody luxury | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal
Neither do I. I don't have time with my 20 hour shift at the sanctuary for abandoned baby animals. "Yes, I’ve cut my hours back to 23 now | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I deleted Facebook in 2017 when it became meme central. "I deleted early 2018 and can happily say I have never missed it
Lily | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've stopped looking at Facebook because it's full of people telling me of their saintly thoughts " There is enough of those types on here!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm a cnut" I'm feeling cunty today | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just posted a long rant on Facebook about how I hate virtual signalling.
I mentioned all the good posts that I do post, as an example that people can follow.
Such altruism. "Yeah I need to post about that too | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think there's a very fine line to be found with it - it's usually crossed once that virtue is signalled at every given opportunity and almost shoe-horned into conversations and comments - have seen it both here and on other social media - and usually comes across that the person doing it has something to prove, not only to others, but themselves. Distinguishing between actual virtue signalling and people expressing their honest beliefs and opinions can be tricky and is probably not helped by "virtue signalling" being over used as an insult or to put down someone else's opinion. What finally pushed me over the edge was a post by an acquaintance saying they'd seen some very reduced chocolate in a shop so had bought ten. The number of people who replied saying how selfish they were and the only reason they would buy so many would be to donate them to a worthy cause was quite astounding. "
If it was me I would have bought 20 boxes and given 19 to the homeless bloke on the high street. And told him to take a pic of me handing them over. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think there's a very fine line to be found with it - it's usually crossed once that virtue is signalled at every given opportunity and almost shoe-horned into conversations and comments - have seen it both here and on other social media - and usually comes across that the person doing it has something to prove, not only to others, but themselves. Distinguishing between actual virtue signalling and people expressing their honest beliefs and opinions can be tricky and is probably not helped by "virtue signalling" being over used as an insult or to put down someone else's opinion. What finally pushed me over the edge was a post by an acquaintance saying they'd seen some very reduced chocolate in a shop so had bought ten. The number of people who replied saying how selfish they were and the only reason they would buy so many would be to donate them to a worthy cause was quite astounding.
If it was me I would have bought 20 boxes and given 19 to the homeless bloke on the high street. And told him to take a pic of me handing them over. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Because being anti virtue signalling is seen as virtuous, I'll keep my opinion of it to myself
Yep I am fully aware of the irony of my thread.
I appreciate the humour in many of these replies too.
It's just that sometimes I'd like to be able to say something without people telling me that they would never do that because they are far too selfless/humble/all round good eggs. "Yeah, the potential for irony did make me smile! The ones that get me are the people who post a comment or topic like "what do you think about *insert positive subject here*" or "do you think you're a *insert positive attribute here* type of person" with the express purpose of showing off their supposed aptitude. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anyone else been following the recent story of Milwall fans booing the players as they "take the knee" before the Milwall/Derby match? The Milwall fans have been castigated, condemned and accused of racism. But it's not racist is it? "Taking the knee" is the zenith of virtue signaling. " Now I know what it means I wholeheartedly agree with you, it is | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anyone else been following the recent story of Milwall fans booing the players as they "take the knee" before the Milwall/Derby match? The Milwall fans have been castigated, condemned and accused of racism. But it's not racist is it? "Taking the knee" is the zenith of virtue signaling. " There's a difference between offering support for a cause, and virtue signalling. It's a fine line though and unfortunately modern discourse doesn't have much time for complexity. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gets on my nerves. Just saying " To be fair, it isn't just Facebook. There are just as many self-righteous and sanctimonious people on fab. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anyone else been following the recent story of Milwall fans booing the players as they "take the knee" before the Milwall/Derby match? The Milwall fans have been castigated, condemned and accused of racism. But it's not racist is it? "Taking the knee" is the zenith of virtue signaling. " So symbols of support for a cause are bad because we throw a phrase at it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's even worse when it's corporate " Oh god I loathe that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anyone else been following the recent story of Milwall fans booing the players as they "take the knee" before the Milwall/Derby match? The Milwall fans have been castigated, condemned and accused of racism. But it's not racist is it? "Taking the knee" is the zenith of virtue signaling. There's a difference between offering support for a cause, and virtue signalling. It's a fine line though and unfortunately modern discourse doesn't have much time for complexity." But what "cause"? It is exceedingly patronising when multi millionaire footballers (many of whom are black) lecture fans on morality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's more the hypocrisy that I don't like. You've done something nice? I don't really care, but good on you. Let's just stop the pretence that you're an angel walking amongst us mere mortals though eh? We all know you're often a complete cuntwaffle "Again, I totally agree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling." Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism. "Taking a knee... supporting the fight against racism... the extremes of moral terrorism
Anyway... no point derailing the thread with this nonsense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's more the hypocrisy that I don't like. You've done something nice? I don't really care, but good on you. Let's just stop the pretence that you're an angel walking amongst us mere mortals though eh? We all know you're often a complete cuntwaffle "Spot on...the irony is strong | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism.
Taking a knee... supporting the fight against racism... the extremes of moral terrorism
Anyway... no point derailing the thread with this nonsense."It's fucking hilarious | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think there's a very fine line to be found with it - it's usually crossed once that virtue is signalled at every given opportunity and almost shoe-horned into conversations and comments - have seen it both here and on other social media - and usually comes across that the person doing it has something to prove, not only to others, but themselves. Distinguishing between actual virtue signalling and people expressing their honest beliefs and opinions can be tricky and is probably not helped by "virtue signalling" being over used as an insult or to put down someone else's opinion. What finally pushed me over the edge was a post by an acquaintance saying they'd seen some very reduced chocolate in a shop so had bought ten. The number of people who replied saying how selfish they were and the only reason they would buy so many would be to donate them to a worthy cause was quite astounding.
If it was me I would have bought 20 boxes and given 19 to the homeless bloke on the high street. And told him to take a pic of me handing them over. "A saint walks among us | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think there's a very fine line to be found with it - it's usually crossed once that virtue is signalled at every given opportunity and almost shoe-horned into conversations and comments - have seen it both here and on other social media - and usually comes across that the person doing it has something to prove, not only to others, but themselves. Distinguishing between actual virtue signalling and people expressing their honest beliefs and opinions can be tricky and is probably not helped by "virtue signalling" being over used as an insult or to put down someone else's opinion. What finally pushed me over the edge was a post by an acquaintance saying they'd seen some very reduced chocolate in a shop so had bought ten. The number of people who replied saying how selfish they were and the only reason they would buy so many would be to donate them to a worthy cause was quite astounding.
If it was me I would have bought 20 boxes and given 19 to the homeless bloke on the high street. And told him to take a pic of me handing them over. "That made me LOL | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It also promotes group think; after all, if so many are embracing a cause or theme and flaunting it, why shouldn't you?" Because we're not sheep! Supporting a cause, such as BLM for example, is not virtue signalling, it's lending support. Virtue signalling to me is "look at me, I've done something wonderful for no reward" when by shouting about it, the motivation becomes obvious, as does the reward. The other, much overlooked aspect to this is when people with a higher than average profile, use their profile to get something done. I'm thinking here of Marcus Rashford and his school meals campaign. His motivation for that was quite clearly explained... he benefited from it as a child, need support and was now using his position to help others. That campaign wouldn't have had the same impact if it had been done by Beryl McBucket in Salford. Would love to write more but have to take a load of caviar and venison to the food bank. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism.
Taking a knee... supporting the fight against racism... the extremes of moral terrorism
Anyway... no point derailing the thread with this nonsense."In what way does Taking the knee support the fight against racism? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Like the expression, political correctness, virtue signalling is another right wing creation intended to delegitimise objection and protest. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's even worse when it's corporate " But again it comes down to how it manifests itself - were Sainsburys virtue signalling by supporting Black History Month? Are footballers (who could be defined collectively as a corporation) doing so by taking the knee? I'm not saying in either instance they are, but I can also understand how people might interpret it as such. So I guess it comes down to how "virtue signalling" is defined, regardless of whether that be at a corporate or personal level. For me showing support for a cause when appropriate isn't doing so, but continually using a platform (such as social media) at every possible opportunity to effectively "show off" one's good character, often shoe horning it in somehow, most definitely is. It all comes back to that fine line I mentioned earlier. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism.
Taking a knee... supporting the fight against racism... the extremes of moral terrorism
Anyway... no point derailing the thread with this nonsense.
In what way does Taking the knee support the fight against racism?
"It's now a fairly widely recognised gesture of solidarity with an anti-racism movement which started in the US but has since gained global resonance. You could do some research on it yourself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've stopped looking at Facebook because it's full of people telling me of their saintly thoughts " I didnt know I knew quite so many saints either | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism.
Taking a knee... supporting the fight against racism... the extremes of moral terrorism
Anyway... no point derailing the thread with this nonsense.
In what way does Taking the knee support the fight against racism?
It's now a fairly widely recognised gesture of solidarity with an anti-racism movement which started in the US but has since gained global resonance. You could do some research on it yourself. "Yes, I know it is and I have been studying the new Religion of Virtue since long before George Floyd was murdered. I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. Absolutely. Coerced thinking is a form of moral terrorism.
Taking a knee... supporting the fight against racism... the extremes of moral terrorism
Anyway... no point derailing the thread with this nonsense.
In what way does Taking the knee support the fight against racism?
It's now a fairly widely recognised gesture of solidarity with an anti-racism movement which started in the US but has since gained global resonance. You could do some research on it yourself.
Yes, I know it is and I have been studying the new Religion of Virtue since long before George Floyd was murdered. I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism."It's now a fairly widely recognised gesture of solidarity with an anti-racism movement which started in the US but has since gained global resonance 
You do understand that widespread support and visibility furthers a cause yes? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism." I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Like the expression, political correctness, virtue signalling is another right wing creation intended to delegitimise objection and protest." This is by far the most sensible post in this entire thread. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence?" I really think we're no longer speaking the same language or working from the same set of values anymore. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence?" I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal "This is why it's better to lurk more and post less on social media. Although to me it seems that people who post more tend to be less secure in their own beliefs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal
This is why it's better to lurk more and post less on social media. Although to me it seems that people who post more tend to be less secure in their own beliefs."I’m not sure about that. I think people who are conident in their beliefs do their own brand of virtue signalling too. Look how difficult this thread was for Mrs N not to be ironic in nature. Same with the what do you think about xyz topic or ‘be kind’ threads. I am most worried about those that say they ‘never virtue signal’ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think there's a very fine line to be found with it - it's usually crossed once that virtue is signalled at every given opportunity and almost shoe-horned into conversations and comments - have seen it both here and on other social media - and usually comes across that the person doing it has something to prove, not only to others, but themselves. Distinguishing between actual virtue signalling and people expressing their honest beliefs and opinions can be tricky and is probably not helped by "virtue signalling" being over used as an insult or to put down someone else's opinion. What finally pushed me over the edge was a post by an acquaintance saying they'd seen some very reduced chocolate in a shop so had bought ten. The number of people who replied saying how selfish they were and the only reason they would buy so many would be to donate them to a worthy cause was quite astounding. " Only ten! I guess it does depend on the best before date, but if it had been the good 85% stuff with a decent shelf life (say more than a week?) I'd have been tempted to take the box load... Sorry OP, what was the question? I got distracted by chocolate... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal
This is why it's better to lurk more and post less on social media. Although to me it seems that people who post more tend to be less secure in their own beliefs.
I’m not sure about that. I think people who are conident in their beliefs do their own brand of virtue signalling too. Look how difficult this thread was for Mrs N not to be ironic in nature. Same with the what do you think about xyz topic or ‘be kind’ threads. I am most worried about those that say they ‘never virtue signal’ "A very good point, although I was strictly talking about social media like FB. I think that this site is to dissimilar for it to really count. Those people that claim that they "never virtue signal" are either lying or are actually sociopaths that care only for themselves. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal
This is why it's better to lurk more and post less on social media. Although to me it seems that people who post more tend to be less secure in their own beliefs.
I’m not sure about that. I think people who are conident in their beliefs do their own brand of virtue signalling too. Look how difficult this thread was for Mrs N not to be ironic in nature. Same with the what do you think about xyz topic or ‘be kind’ threads. I am most worried about those that say they ‘never virtue signal’
A very good point, although I was strictly talking about social media like FB. I think that this site is to dissimilar for it to really count. Those people that claim that they "never virtue signal" are either lying or are actually sociopaths that care only for themselves."Agreed, to a greater or lesser extent everyone has done so at some point either by design or subconsciously - it's when it's continually done, and shoe horned into conversations that it goes into the realms of the kind of virtue signalling the OP is referring to - when every opportunity to make themselves look wonderful is taken with constant references to charitable acts they do or have done and similar and it starts to become "me, me, me, look at me" - we all know people who do it, whether it be here, social media or in day to day life. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never virtue signal
This is why it's better to lurk more and post less on social media. Although to me it seems that people who post more tend to be less secure in their own beliefs.
I’m not sure about that. I think people who are conident in their beliefs do their own brand of virtue signalling too. Look how difficult this thread was for Mrs N not to be ironic in nature. Same with the what do you think about xyz topic or ‘be kind’ threads. I am most worried about those that say they ‘never virtue signal’
A very good point, although I was strictly talking about social media like FB. I think that this site is to dissimilar for it to really count. Those people that claim that they "never virtue signal" are either lying or are actually sociopaths that care only for themselves."I might be a sociopath, but I know I’m a mythomaniac | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. " If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it..." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And yes, having been born and brought up in this country, there is almost certainly some level of xenophobia and racism ingrained within my own psyche. None of us are immune to it. The best we can do is try to recognise it, and try to be better." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And yes, having been born and brought up in this country, there is almost certainly some level of xenophobia and racism ingrained within my own psyche. None of us are immune to it. The best we can do is try to recognise it, and try to be better." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And yes, having been born and brought up in this country, there is almost certainly some level of xenophobia and racism ingrained within my own psyche. None of us are immune to it. The best we can do is try to recognise it, and try to be better." Not just this country | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And yes, having been born and brought up in this country, there is almost certainly some level of xenophobia and racism ingrained within my own psyche. None of us are immune to it. The best we can do is try to recognise it, and try to be better." As they say in Avenue Q we are all a little racist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anyone else been following the recent story of Milwall fans booing the players as they "take the knee" before the Milwall/Derby match? The Milwall fans have been castigated, condemned and accused of racism. But it's not racist is it? "Taking the knee" is the zenith of virtue signaling. " So the booing was a protest against virtue signalling? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gets on my nerves. Just saying " Does it outrage you so much you wrote a post about it ....that in itself would be virtue signalling | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it..."
Throw in a gutter level media and the validation of ukip.
There is an argument that the b word has opened a can of worms. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it..." Exactly this... The simple fact that people were booing what is a recognised anti-racism gesture THAT HARMS ABSOLUTELY NOBODY shows that racism is alive and well in this country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling." This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause " God, yes, the poppy thing. Yikes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And yes, having been born and brought up in this country, there is almost certainly some level of xenophobia and racism ingrained within my own psyche. None of us are immune to it. The best we can do is try to recognise it, and try to be better." yep so true.
I have it too and I'm black
Just the left half though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause " Are the aggressive comments coming from people your mate meets while wearing the poppy? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause Are the aggressive comments coming from people your mate meets while wearing the poppy?" Look at the abuse that player from Ireland gets. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause Are the aggressive comments coming from people your mate meets while wearing the poppy?" Sorry, not understanding the point of this question. The people wouldn't know if they wore one if it wasn't visible. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause Are the aggressive comments coming from people your mate meets while wearing the poppy? Sorry, not understanding the point of this question. The people wouldn't know if they wore one if it wasn't visible. " I meant from people in real life as opposed to from people on social media | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it." I don't wear a poppy. Perhaps the quirks of my upbringing, but some aspects of patriotism and civic pride I was taught to wear lightly. I commemorate in my own way. And yes, I've been confronted. People are welcome to mind their own business. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause Are the aggressive comments coming from people your mate meets while wearing the poppy? Sorry, not understanding the point of this question. The people wouldn't know if they wore one if it wasn't visible. I meant from people in real life as opposed to from people on social media " Yes in real life, they've worn one since before the age of social media | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause Are the aggressive comments coming from people your mate meets while wearing the poppy? Sorry, not understanding the point of this question. The people wouldn't know if they wore one if it wasn't visible. I meant from people in real life as opposed to from people on social media Yes in real life, they've worn one since before the age of social media " I’ve received verbal abuse from a skinhead for not wearing a poppy while I was in the street about 3 years ago.. ... I had actually been wearing one but it had fallen off, but I then took the opportunity to give the nationalistic little prick a piece of my mind about why it’s none of his business and that one of the freedoms that have been fought for is the freedom to not be forced into wearing any symbol you don’t want to... I served in the Army for 13 years... I couldn’t give a shit if you wear a poppy or not or what colour it is if you do, because that’s your right.... we literally fought against people that insisted on making people wear certain symbols | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing wrong with signals of support for a cause if this isn't taken to the extreme. Athletes, especially in the USA, have been pressured and coerced for toeing the line so as to not be branded as racists, bigots etc. Especially if they choose to stand for the anthem which is a sign of respect. Phrases that are often used now such as "silence is violence" intimidate people to conform to groupthink. It's the most pervasive form of virtue signaling. This isn't just a BLM issue though. I have a mate who decides to wear a white poppy not a red one, always has for years. The amount of aggressive comments they get is astonishing. We're bombarded in the UK that we should wear a poppy is the only way to mark of respect, which is untrue in my opinion. A movement will always have its signature way of getting it's message across, and there will always be some who are fanatical about it and those who want to show support. It's the way humans work regardless of the cause Are the aggressive comments coming from people your mate meets while wearing the poppy? Sorry, not understanding the point of this question. The people wouldn't know if they wore one if it wasn't visible. I meant from people in real life as opposed to from people on social media Yes in real life, they've worn one since before the age of social media I’ve received verbal abuse from a skinhead for not wearing a poppy while I was in the street about 3 years ago.. ... I had actually been wearing one but it had fallen off, but I then took the opportunity to give the nationalistic little prick a piece of my mind about why it’s none of his business and that one of the freedoms that have been fought for is the freedom to not be forced into wearing any symbol you don’t want to... I served in the Army for 13 years... I couldn’t give a shit if you wear a poppy or not or what colour it is if you do, because that’s your right.... we literally fought against people that insisted on making people wear certain symbols" Exactly this, actions over a symbol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Virtue Signalling" is this years "Snowflake", which was the year before's "White Knight". They're terms that always strikes me as a bit mean spirited and "side eyes-y". Some people are needier than others and need that well done and pat on the back. If that's virtue signalling then in the grand scheme of things it doesn't bother me. I'd rather hear about someone's good deed than some of the horrible stuff that pops up in my news feed. We need more good deeds "I agree... it’s a handy term that certain sections of society like to use when something doesn’t fit their narrative... I’ve been called a White Knight for standing up for a friend being bullied by sexists.. I’ve been called a Social Justice Warrior Snowflake for denouncing racism... I’ve been called a Virtue Signaller for being sympathetic of migrants and asylum seekers... I’m sure you can guess the type of people that have made these comments | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Virtue Signalling" is this years "Snowflake", which was the year before's "White Knight". They're terms that always strikes me as a bit mean spirited and "side eyes-y". Some people are needier than others and need that well done and pat on the back. If that's virtue signalling then in the grand scheme of things it doesn't bother me. I'd rather hear about someone's good deed than some of the horrible stuff that pops up in my news feed. We need more good deeds
I agree... it’s a handy term that certain sections of society like to use when something doesn’t fit their narrative...
I’ve been called a White Knight for standing up for a friend being bullied by sexists..
I’ve been called a Social Justice Warrior Snowflake for denouncing racism...
I’ve been called a Virtue Signaller for being sympathetic of migrants and asylum seekers...
I’m sure you can guess the type of people that have made these comments "I just take it as a compliment these days. Yes, I am everything you despise. Good! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it. I don't wear a poppy. Perhaps the quirks of my upbringing, but some aspects of patriotism and civic pride I was taught to wear lightly. I commemorate in my own way. And yes, I've been confronted. People are welcome to mind their own business." I fully agree and do the same myself, I fervently object to been told how I must celebrate or commemorate an event. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it. I don't wear a poppy. Perhaps the quirks of my upbringing, but some aspects of patriotism and civic pride I was taught to wear lightly. I commemorate in my own way. And yes, I've been confronted. People are welcome to mind their own business. I fully agree and do the same myself, I fervently object to been told how I must celebrate or commemorate an event." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it..." More on the windrush scandal - that the government give the impression that they have put right. A report in the Guardian yesterday - it was actually about 15,000 people that were mistreated and political promises given about compensation. A pot of £200 million was allocated (yes two hundred million pounds, that is the scale of the offence the home office committed). But two years on, only 226 of the 15 thousand have received any compensation, and only £2 million of the allocated money has been released. We live in a country that illegally deports it's own citizens and gets away with it because they have black skin. There are times when i am ashamed to be English. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. " Just wondering, what colour is the sky in your world? Britain took xenophobia to new rights of stupidity with brexit, while simultaneously unleashing a tide of racism and hatred onto the population. If you've not noticed, seen or experienced this, you're living a very sheltered life. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've stopped looking at Facebook because it's full of people telling me of their saintly thoughts " Im not on facebook so cannot see these wonderful examples of the species | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Social Virtue Signalling, Social Justice Warriors, Wokeness: All unadulterated forms of cuntery. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting. What's the difference between this 'virtue signalling' thing and attacking people for doing good things?" Excellent question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. Just wondering, what colour is the sky in your world? Britain took xenophobia to new rights of stupidity with brexit, while simultaneously unleashing a tide of racism and hatred onto the population. If you've not noticed, seen or experienced this, you're living a very sheltered life." This is from a National Front election poster in 1970 Stop immigration Reject Common Market Make Britain great again Scrap overseas aid Rebuild our armed forces It's Tory policy in 2020, fascism is pretty much mainstream now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Social Virtue Signalling, Social Justice Warriors, Wokeness: All unadulterated forms of cuntery. "Crikey....thats a bit OTP | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it."  white poppies are an insult. A spit in the face of soldiers, service personnel and their families everywhere. The poppy is about those who sacrificed and far more than WWI. Your whole statement is insulting. You don't understand the meaning of that nor of virtual signalling. It's like when people are racist then try to justify it away with saying "I don't think it's offensive". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting. What's the difference between this 'virtue signalling' thing and attacking people for doing good things?" I think you'll find that it's not the "doing good things" that are being called into question - more the "doing good things" and then feeling the need to make a big show of having done those good things as a show of how good a person is, usually for self-promotion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting. What's the difference between this 'virtue signalling' thing and attacking people for doing good things? I think you'll find that it's not the "doing good things" that are being called into question - more the "doing good things" and then feeling the need to make a big show of having done those good things as a show of how good a person is, usually for self-promotion. " But if more people did good things instead of just leaving it to 'someone else' then surely the problem, such as it is, wouldn't be? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it. white poppies are an insult. A spit in the face of soldiers, service personnel and their families everywhere. The poppy is about those who sacrificed and far more than WWI. Your whole statement is insulting. You don't understand the meaning of that nor of virtual signalling. It's like when people are racist then try to justify it away with saying "I don't think it's offensive". "Oh dear | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting. What's the difference between this 'virtue signalling' thing and attacking people for doing good things? I think you'll find that it's not the "doing good things" that are being called into question - more the "doing good things" and then feeling the need to make a big show of having done those good things as a show of how good a person is, usually for self-promotion. But if more people did good things instead of just leaving it to 'someone else' then surely the problem, such as it is, wouldn't be?" Absolutely - nothing wrong with doing good things whatsoever and I think far more do than people may realise, just most people don't feel the need to shout that they have done a good thing from the rooftops. That is of course just one example of virtue signalling though - it can take on many forms and as I said way up there ^^ there is a fine line between virtue signalling and what is called out as it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting. What's the difference between this 'virtue signalling' thing and attacking people for doing good things?" Two sides of the same coin perhaps? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting. What's the difference between this 'virtue signalling' thing and attacking people for doing good things? I think you'll find that it's not the "doing good things" that are being called into question - more the "doing good things" and then feeling the need to make a big show of having done those good things as a show of how good a person is, usually for self-promotion. But if more people did good things instead of just leaving it to 'someone else' then surely the problem, such as it is, wouldn't be? Absolutely - nothing wrong with doing good things whatsoever and I think far more do than people may realise, just most people don't feel the need to shout that they have done a good thing from the rooftops. That is of course just one example of virtue signalling though - it can take on many forms and as I said way up there ^^ there is a fine line between virtue signalling and what is called out as it" I have to say that I'd seen the term used here, but not elsewhere. It still seems like a licence to bully. If I rescued puppies and fliffy kittens in my spare time, then I'd want to talk about it in the hope that I could tempt others into doing the same. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Virtue Signalling" is this years "Snowflake", which was the year before's "White Knight". They're terms that always strikes me as a bit mean spirited and "side eyes-y". Some people are needier than others and need that well done and pat on the back. If that's virtue signalling then in the grand scheme of things it doesn't bother me. I'd rather hear about someone's good deed than some of the horrible stuff that pops up in my news feed. We need more good deeds "I like hearing someone praise the good deeds of others. I’m less fond of talking about good things I’ve done. I guess it all comes down to value differences and motives. It is easy to assume the motive of another based on our own values and motives. My self deprecation is probably just as irritating as virtue signalling to some. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Virtue Signalling" is this years "Snowflake", which was the year before's "White Knight". They're terms that always strikes me as a bit mean spirited and "side eyes-y". Some people are needier than others and need that well done and pat on the back. If that's virtue signalling then in the grand scheme of things it doesn't bother me. I'd rather hear about someone's good deed than some of the horrible stuff that pops up in my news feed. We need more good deeds
I like hearing someone praise the good deeds of others. I’m less fond of talking about good things I’ve done. I guess it all comes down to value differences and motives. It is easy to assume the motive of another based on our own values and motives. My self deprecation is probably just as irritating as virtue signalling to some.
"It seems to me that sometimes when you mention things in passing - like hey, this is what I did today - if it doesn't align with certain politics then it's like you should be ashamed of yourself for doing it. Society is weird. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it. white poppies are an insult. A spit in the face of soldiers, service personnel and their families everywhere. The poppy is about those who sacrificed and far more than WWI. Your whole statement is insulting. You don't understand the meaning of that nor of virtual signalling. It's like when people are racist then try to justify it away with saying "I don't think it's offensive". "As an ex serviceman let me say this... What you’ve just said about the white poppy is complete bollocks. The white poppy is to symbolise the hope for an end to war while remembering those who have fallen, something everyone who has actually been in that situation fervently hopes for | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I have to say that I'd seen the term used here, but not elsewhere. It still seems like a licence to bully. If I rescued puppies and fliffy kittens in my spare time, then I'd want to talk about it in the hope that I could tempt others into doing the same." It's been around in social media and internet forums for a while, and as someone said further up has been misappropriated to a degree and come to be used as an insult or as a means of closing down an alternate opinion that someone disagrees with. I guess it comes down to doing good things and publicising them to promote a cause and doing so at every given opportunity as a means of self-promotion rather than the cause itself - and there's a very fine line between the two, both in how someone puts that across and also those that call it out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it. white poppies are an insult. A spit in the face of soldiers, service personnel and their families everywhere. The poppy is about those who sacrificed and far more than WWI. Your whole statement is insulting. You don't understand the meaning of that nor of virtual signalling. It's like when people are racist then try to justify it away with saying "I don't think it's offensive".
As an ex serviceman let me say this... What you’ve just said about the white poppy is complete bollocks.
The white poppy is to symbolise the hope for an end to war while remembering those who have fallen, something everyone who has actually been in that situation fervently hopes for"It's an interesting display, though. Apparently one side of politics wants to create groupthink. And yet when it comes to poppies... well. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it. white poppies are an insult. A spit in the face of soldiers, service personnel and their families everywhere. The poppy is about those who sacrificed and far more than WWI. Your whole statement is insulting. You don't understand the meaning of that nor of virtual signalling. It's like when people are racist then try to justify it away with saying "I don't think it's offensive".
As an ex serviceman let me say this... What you’ve just said about the white poppy is complete bollocks.
The white poppy is to symbolise the hope for an end to war while remembering those who have fallen, something everyone who has actually been in that situation fervently hopes for
It's an interesting display, though.
Apparently one side of politics wants to create groupthink. And yet when it comes to poppies... well."The poppy and remembrance of veterans has been hijacked by nationalists as a way to accuse people of a lack of patriotism... Similarly you see racists like Tommy Robinson “protecting” cenotaphs | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I too wear a white poppy rather than a red one. For those of us that do it is a sign that we recognize that WW1, far from being a war for "freedom" (as we are all taught to believe) was actually a war for empire,for the banks and for the corporations. The people that berate us for wearing a white poppy are Virtue signaling in their own way because they mistakenly think that the white poppy dishonors the fallen and is a symbol of cowardice. Far from it. white poppies are an insult. A spit in the face of soldiers, service personnel and their families everywhere. The poppy is about those who sacrificed and far more than WWI. Your whole statement is insulting. You don't understand the meaning of that nor of virtual signalling. It's like when people are racist then try to justify it away with saying "I don't think it's offensive".
As an ex serviceman let me say this... What you’ve just said about the white poppy is complete bollocks.
The white poppy is to symbolise the hope for an end to war while remembering those who have fallen, something everyone who has actually been in that situation fervently hopes for
It's an interesting display, though.
Apparently one side of politics wants to create groupthink. And yet when it comes to poppies... well.
The poppy and remembrance of veterans has been hijacked by nationalists as a way to accuse people of a lack of patriotism... Similarly you see racists like Tommy Robinson “protecting” cenotaphs "One of the reasons I point blank refuse to participate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's hard to call out virtue signalling without doing it yourself. "hey look at what this person/company is doing wrong, I would Never do that" " Either that, or it's vice signalling. Look at this person doing good things. I'm much worse, praise me! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it... More on the windrush scandal - that the government give the impression that they have put right. A report in the Guardian yesterday - it was actually about 15,000 people that were mistreated and political promises given about compensation. A pot of £200 million was allocated (yes two hundred million pounds, that is the scale of the offence the home office committed). But two years on, only 226 of the 15 thousand have received any compensation, and only £2 million of the allocated money has been released. We live in a country that illegally deports it's own citizens and gets away with it because they have black skin. There are times when i am ashamed to be English." Im often ashamed to be English | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it... More on the windrush scandal - that the government give the impression that they have put right. A report in the Guardian yesterday - it was actually about 15,000 people that were mistreated and political promises given about compensation. A pot of £200 million was allocated (yes two hundred million pounds, that is the scale of the offence the home office committed). But two years on, only 226 of the 15 thousand have received any compensation, and only £2 million of the allocated money has been released. We live in a country that illegally deports it's own citizens and gets away with it because they have black skin. There are times when i am ashamed to be English. Im often ashamed to be English" It's only in the last couple of weeks Priti Patel was using the term 'do gooders' as an insult. This was in the context of people opposed to deportation flights. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it... More on the windrush scandal - that the government give the impression that they have put right. A report in the Guardian yesterday - it was actually about 15,000 people that were mistreated and political promises given about compensation. A pot of £200 million was allocated (yes two hundred million pounds, that is the scale of the offence the home office committed). But two years on, only 226 of the 15 thousand have received any compensation, and only £2 million of the allocated money has been released. We live in a country that illegally deports it's own citizens and gets away with it because they have black skin. There are times when i am ashamed to be English. Im often ashamed to be English It's only in the last couple of weeks Priti Patel was using the term 'do gooders' as an insult. This was in the context of people opposed to deportation flights. " Its often used as a derogatory term on here. Pesky do gooders with their pesky human rights. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Gets on my nerves. Just saying " Never, EVER go on LinkedIn..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it... More on the windrush scandal - that the government give the impression that they have put right. A report in the Guardian yesterday - it was actually about 15,000 people that were mistreated and political promises given about compensation. A pot of £200 million was allocated (yes two hundred million pounds, that is the scale of the offence the home office committed). But two years on, only 226 of the 15 thousand have received any compensation, and only £2 million of the allocated money has been released. We live in a country that illegally deports it's own citizens and gets away with it because they have black skin. There are times when i am ashamed to be English. Im often ashamed to be English It's only in the last couple of weeks Priti Patel was using the term 'do gooders' as an insult. This was in the context of people opposed to deportation flights. Its often used as a derogatory term on here. Pesky do gooders with their pesky human rights." And that's how they win, they frame it as political correctness, virtue signalling or Priti's words, do-gooders. This invisible always present enemy of 'plain speaking', just 'common sense' and tradition. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I guess it comes down to doing good things and publicising them to promote a cause and doing so at every given opportunity as a means of self-promotion rather than the cause itself - and there's a very fine line between the two, both in how someone puts that across and also those that call it out." Sounds like it's a thin and poorly defined line with a broad brush used as judgment. Given it also seems to be based on little more than a judgment call in the first place, it would seem both prudent and polite not to call people out for doing a 'good thing' perhaps? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I just fail to see how taking the knee does anything at all to further the cause against racism. I know right? When some of the most televised sporting events have household name celebrities kneeling to show their support for an anti-racism campaign... can't see how that could further a cause? Really? Exposure? Prominence? I think you're missing my point. Yes, of course having the endorsement of celebrity is a good thing and certainly helps with exposure Etc. But, who exactly is all this anti racism aimed at? Yes, there are racist people in the world but the UK is certainly not xenophobic Hell hole that the media would have you believe. If you think the UK is not xenophobic, you've not been looking very hard. This would be the country that is just in the process of sawing off it's own legs in order to get rid of "johnny foreigner". That has a prime minister who talks of "watermelon smiles", "picaninnies" and "letterboxes". That has a Home Office that a few years ago deliberately destroyed a load of immigration records, then proceeded to illegally deport almost a thousand second or third generation British citizens of Carribbean descent - most of whom have still not been given any compensation, some of whom have died in destitution in a foreign country where they don't even have any relatives. Nope, nothing xenophobic about the UK. The country that has institutionalised xenophobia to the point where it has become almost invisible to the ones doing it... More on the windrush scandal - that the government give the impression that they have put right. A report in the Guardian yesterday - it was actually about 15,000 people that were mistreated and political promises given about compensation. A pot of £200 million was allocated (yes two hundred million pounds, that is the scale of the offence the home office committed). But two years on, only 226 of the 15 thousand have received any compensation, and only £2 million of the allocated money has been released. We live in a country that illegally deports it's own citizens and gets away with it because they have black skin. There are times when i am ashamed to be English. Im often ashamed to be English It's only in the last couple of weeks Priti Patel was using the term 'do gooders' as an insult. This was in the context of people opposed to deportation flights. Its often used as a derogatory term on here. Pesky do gooders with their pesky human rights. And that's how they win, they frame it as political correctness, virtue signalling or Priti's words, do-gooders. This invisible always present enemy of 'plain speaking', just 'common sense' and tradition." And it seems to becoming more popular with terms like snowflake and woke being branded as insults. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I guess it comes down to doing good things and publicising them to promote a cause and doing so at every given opportunity as a means of self-promotion rather than the cause itself - and there's a very fine line between the two, both in how someone puts that across and also those that call it out. Sounds like it's a thin and poorly defined line with a broad brush used as judgment. Given it also seems to be based on little more than a judgment call in the first place, it would seem both prudent and polite not to call people out for doing a 'good thing' perhaps? " I'm not so sure about the broad brush - it's usually fairly obvious when someone is doing it, they manage to shoe horn their "good deed" into the most irrelevant comments at every opportunity to make themselves appear good, or to use the example the OP gave way back when up thread - a friend of theirs posted how they'd found bars of chocolate going cheaply so bought ten bars - and were rounded on and told they were in the wrong by people saying they'd have bought them and given them to charity - those are examples of it at its worst. Of course it's a judgement call, but in the examples I've given you can see why people might make it, and likewise of course doing a "good thing" is a "good thing" whichever way you look at it of that there is no question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"its not what you say, its how you say it." Precisely...and sometimes how often you say it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"its not what you say, its how you say it. Precisely...and sometimes how often you say it "Frequency has nothing to do with it, they may just genuinely be nice... When it’s blatantly false is when it becomes a problem... for example the trend not so long ago of people posting photos on social media of themselves giving to the homeless to garner “likes”. Posting purely to make yourself look good or to garner praise from others is reprehensible.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"its not what you say, its how you say it. Precisely...and sometimes how often you say it "I have no problem with someone saying that they have done a good thing. I do have a problem with people piddling on other people's fireworks (as in my example at the start of the thread) to make themselves look good. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"its not what you say, its how you say it. Precisely...and sometimes how often you say it
Frequency has nothing to do with it, they may just genuinely be nice...
When it’s blatantly false is when it becomes a problem... for example the trend not so long ago of people posting photos on social media of themselves giving to the homeless to garner “likes”.
Posting purely to make yourself look good or to garner praise from others is reprehensible.."That's why I said "sometimes" - although the proponents of the example you gave are a good example where frequency does come into it - as it was usually more than just that one post...just in case you missed it the first few times | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"its not what you say, its how you say it. Precisely...and sometimes how often you say it
I have no problem with someone saying that they have done a good thing. I do have a problem with people piddling on other people's fireworks (as in my example at the start of the thread) to make themselves look good. "Agreed, although again as you said, it does come down to how it's said in either case | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are." Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though." No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics." It does seem to go along political lines. Mention charity work or activism in passing and you're virtue signalling. Talk about how wonderful you are and invent endless opportunities for people to tell you how wonderful you are - oh obviously you're wonderful, it's not virtue signalling at all. Poppycock. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics." I'm not sure they would to be honest. Mostly because they actually did things and in many cases were very private about what they did. Not true of all of course. Most people who I would consider virtue signalling do nothing or at least very little. Its always about being on a soap box and more importantly implying you're better than other people. One particular thing that makes me cautious that someone is virtue signalling is how often it is negative. Its about being vocally "anti" something. Not necessarily doing anything or for anything but being against the evil of that days social media news feed. Calling for someone to be deplatformed, doxed etc because of a contradictory opinion. I happily concede though it is starting to become a dismissive statement that can be thrown at anyone that is saying anything you don't like. Snowflake for 2020 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though." I quite agree. Virtue signaling is not "doing good things". Virtue signaling is the calling out of perceived ethical and moral fault in others. It is vicarious "offense" taking. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Marcus Rashford was vilified on Twitter for Virtue Signalling, because of his work on child poverty and his support for free school meals during the pandemic. It was wrapped up in the term of being a lefty do-gooder as he challenged a government promoted and were filmed clapping for the carers, while knowing they clapped and cheered when they stopped the pay rise for NHS staff.... Who was virtue signalling? " Quite. It's just another right wing term of abuse. People definitely do peacock and claim to be outraged by all sorts, but a private citizen having climbed from nothing to help others, while a government during a pandemic claps and fails to provide adequate protection or a pay rise. Well | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Marcus Rashford was vilified on Twitter for Virtue Signalling, because of his work on child poverty and his support for free school meals during the pandemic. It was wrapped up in the term of being a lefty do-gooder as he challenged a government promoted and were filmed clapping for the carers, while knowing they clapped and cheered when they stopped the pay rise for NHS staff.... Who was virtue signalling? Quite. It's just another right wing term of abuse. People definitely do peacock and claim to be outraged by all sorts, but a private citizen having climbed from nothing to help others, while a government during a pandemic claps and fails to provide adequate protection or a pay rise. Well " Exactly, and Bill Gates donating vast sums to create a Covid vaccine is condemned as wanting to implant tracking chips.... Proof that any altruistic act can be jumped on by the right wing fringe | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics. I'm not sure they would to be honest. Mostly because they actually did things and in many cases were very private about what they did. Not true of all of course. Most people who I would consider virtue signalling do nothing or at least very little. Its always about being on a soap box and more importantly implying you're better than other people. One particular thing that makes me cautious that someone is virtue signalling is how often it is negative. Its about being vocally "anti" something. Not necessarily doing anything or for anything but being against the evil of that days social media news feed. Calling for someone to be deplatformed, doxed etc because of a contradictory opinion. I happily concede though it is starting to become a dismissive statement that can be thrown at anyone that is saying anything you don't like. Snowflake for 2020" Yeah. I find it funny that virtue signalling is a new expression. Did people not virtue signal before? Did we just come up for a name for it. Or have our moral compasses changed to the extent where it is now socially acceptable to frown upon those who do good deeds. I don't buy the assumption that no one is doing good deeds. There's lots of amazing people out there who still care for others. Should they hide their behaviour in shame? Is that what we've come to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics. I'm not sure they would to be honest. Mostly because they actually did things and in many cases were very private about what they did. Not true of all of course. Most people who I would consider virtue signalling do nothing or at least very little. Its always about being on a soap box and more importantly implying you're better than other people. One particular thing that makes me cautious that someone is virtue signalling is how often it is negative. Its about being vocally "anti" something. Not necessarily doing anything or for anything but being against the evil of that days social media news feed. Calling for someone to be deplatformed, doxed etc because of a contradictory opinion. I happily concede though it is starting to become a dismissive statement that can be thrown at anyone that is saying anything you don't like. Snowflake for 2020 Yeah. I find it funny that virtue signalling is a new expression. Did people not virtue signal before? Did we just come up for a name for it. Or have our moral compasses changed to the extent where it is now socially acceptable to frown upon those who do good deeds. I don't buy the assumption that no one is doing good deeds. There's lots of amazing people out there who still care for others. Should they hide their behaviour in shame? Is that what we've come to." Depends if it highlights an issue certain people don’t want highlighting.... child poverty, refugees, racism.. there’s a long list.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics. I'm not sure they would to be honest. Mostly because they actually did things and in many cases were very private about what they did. Not true of all of course. Most people who I would consider virtue signalling do nothing or at least very little. Its always about being on a soap box and more importantly implying you're better than other people. One particular thing that makes me cautious that someone is virtue signalling is how often it is negative. Its about being vocally "anti" something. Not necessarily doing anything or for anything but being against the evil of that days social media news feed. Calling for someone to be deplatformed, doxed etc because of a contradictory opinion. I happily concede though it is starting to become a dismissive statement that can be thrown at anyone that is saying anything you don't like. Snowflake for 2020 Yeah. I find it funny that virtue signalling is a new expression. Did people not virtue signal before? Did we just come up for a name for it. Or have our moral compasses changed to the extent where it is now socially acceptable to frown upon those who do good deeds. I don't buy the assumption that no one is doing good deeds. There's lots of amazing people out there who still care for others. Should they hide their behaviour in shame? Is that what we've come to. Depends if it highlights an issue certain people don’t want highlighting.... child poverty, refugees, racism.. there’s a long list.." Yes, I wonder if "virtue signalling" is cover for "you're making me feel uncomfortable or inadequate". Sorry, not sorry. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics. I'm not sure they would to be honest. Mostly because they actually did things and in many cases were very private about what they did. Not true of all of course. Most people who I would consider virtue signalling do nothing or at least very little. Its always about being on a soap box and more importantly implying you're better than other people. One particular thing that makes me cautious that someone is virtue signalling is how often it is negative. Its about being vocally "anti" something. Not necessarily doing anything or for anything but being against the evil of that days social media news feed. Calling for someone to be deplatformed, doxed etc because of a contradictory opinion. I happily concede though it is starting to become a dismissive statement that can be thrown at anyone that is saying anything you don't like. Snowflake for 2020 Yeah. I find it funny that virtue signalling is a new expression. Did people not virtue signal before? Did we just come up for a name for it. Or have our moral compasses changed to the extent where it is now socially acceptable to frown upon those who do good deeds. I don't buy the assumption that no one is doing good deeds. There's lots of amazing people out there who still care for others. Should they hide their behaviour in shame? Is that what we've come to." I think you're purposely misrepresenting what people have said now. No one is saying there aren't people doing good deeds. The whole point, as a number of people have pointed out, is that virtue signalling isn't about doing good deeds. Its about the people that do sod all but loudly talk about how great they are and how terrible others are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was a time when people tried to better themselves. Make themselves nicer people. But that was too much effort and required character. Today it's so much easier to make being a nice person into some kind of character flaw. That way you can be a complete and utter dick and still come across as the better person. Clever paradigm shift. But I'm old fashioned and still believe good deeds are good deeds. Perhaps when people hear about them, it should inspire them to do more for their fellow man rather than attack the people who show them up for who they really are. Virtue signalling isn't doing good deeds though. No but good deeds and noble thoughts which used to be thought of as philanthropic in days gone by get the "virtue signalling" label hung on them. All the great philanthropists of years gone by would have been ripped to shreds by todays cynics. I'm not sure they would to be honest. Mostly because they actually did things and in many cases were very private about what they did. Not true of all of course. Most people who I would consider virtue signalling do nothing or at least very little. Its always about being on a soap box and more importantly implying you're better than other people. One particular thing that makes me cautious that someone is virtue signalling is how often it is negative. Its about being vocally "anti" something. Not necessarily doing anything or for anything but being against the evil of that days social media news feed. Calling for someone to be deplatformed, doxed etc because of a contradictory opinion. I happily concede though it is starting to become a dismissive statement that can be thrown at anyone that is saying anything you don't like. Snowflake for 2020 Yeah. I find it funny that virtue signalling is a new expression. Did people not virtue signal before? Did we just come up for a name for it. Or have our moral compasses changed to the extent where it is now socially acceptable to frown upon those who do good deeds. I don't buy the assumption that no one is doing good deeds. There's lots of amazing people out there who still care for others. Should they hide their behaviour in shame? Is that what we've come to. I think you're purposely misrepresenting what people have said now. No one is saying there aren't people doing good deeds. The whole point, as a number of people have pointed out, is that virtue signalling isn't about doing good deeds. Its about the people that do sod all but loudly talk about how great they are and how terrible others are." Sometimes. Sometimes those who do sod all come down like a tonne of bricks on any mention, even in passing, of good deeds. I've had it happen to me. I just talk about stuff I do. The crazy thing is, the people who are most keen to put down any mention of my charity work are forever overselling themselves as god's gift to whatever. We're ten years into the so called Big Society. Where government steps back and charities and people step up. It's harder to step up when you're jeered at. Fortunately doing the right thing is often its own reward. (will this be labelled virtue signalling? Probably. I don't care) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
