Virtue signalling

'Twas ever thus.

Interesting concept. We all do it, don't we?

Certainly not! I'm far too virtuous to be sending out any such signals...

I blame Facebook and all the "soundbites" that people post to show how virtuous they are.

And what wonderfully exciting/fulfilling/enviable lives they all lead on FB!

There was a thread on this subject on mumsnet a couple of weeks ago. It was an interesting read, to me at least. I will link it tomorow if I have time.
It is too late at night for me to properly take in the opening post here in its entirity. Or to get my spelling right!

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2464585-to-get-a-bit-irritated-with-all-the-virtue-signalling-on-MN?trending=1

Even the op is interesting.

Quirky little article. It's one of those words or phrases that make you think 'yes, that's exactly what I've been looking for' - like when a toddler discovers the word 'mine'

Yes, sounds a useful phrase doesn't it? We can all use it in general conversation as well as the forum ie to DH "for God's sake stop virtue signalling again Ralph!"

Had to look up yanbu

Lord, now I've just wasted spent another hour reading through a Mumsnet thread. Note to self - Gransnet is taking up enough of your time, keep away from the dark side!

Some entertaining posts on there though. And I've adopted a new word - smugupmanship. Brilliant!

So true. Love it.

Surely someone who keeps telling you what they "hate" is just "signalling" an inability to communicate?

One again, virtue signalling, what they 'hate' are the things that make them look virtuous by so doing.

Think I prefer smugupmanship, to virtue signalling . Goes straight to the point.

Expressing a negative opinion about a newspaper or a political party is supposed to be signalling virtue is it? What is it signalling when people say, for instance, "I don't like and would never read the Guardian" or "I would never go on a demonstration" or "I'm tempted to vote UKIP"?

It's akin to calling people who campaign on behalf of unpopular causes "do-gooders" - an attempt to ridicule and belittle - and discourage others from expressing similar views.

The final paragraph of the article reads:

"I compared them with people I met who thought they were virtuous merely because they voted Labour once every five years and expressed hatred of right-wingers. That is not virtue. That is lazy, self-righteous and silly."

The article doesn't address people who vote Conservative once every five years and who are contemptuous of those on the left, trades unions and anyone who challenges the traditional way of doing things. Why are they not also labelled as lazy, self-righteous and silly?

How presumptuous of this man to imply that people who hold opinions different from himself are, in effect, poseurs and hypocrites because they do nothing to put their beliefs into action. How the hell does he know what they do?

Presumably he asked them.

Yes, they all are lazy, self-righteous and I'd say smug, rather than silly..

I think that those who virtue signal seem to do it on an almost daily, or daily basis, so they are easy to spot. It doesnt matter whether they are left wing, right wing or whatever and wouldnt just do it in relation to politics anyway.

Exactly. Another example is 'I hate/despise gossip', at one stroke making others feel guilty for indulging in it, listening to it or heaven forbid secretly enjoying it, while advertising self-righteous holier-than-thou-ness...

And "I really cannot stand intolerance. I'd shoot all those who can't live and let live!""

MOnica There are many virtuous posters on GN especially on the politics thread.

I love a good bit of gossip!
Feeling free to pm some!