This puzzle is so on-brand. I mean, this is exactly the kind of term I'd expect to find in a puzzle that just this week was reminding us all of the glory of Confederate monuments. That's a term used predominantly by those who are real mad that they can't be as openly racist and homophobic as they used to be in the good ol' days. People who use that term also use terms like "P.C." and "SJW" [and the word that's in the puzzle at 41D]. Super-popular term with right-wing "thought" "leaders." Aggrieved white men love the term. And it's rich coming from an editor who has struggled to keep racism / sexism / classism out of his puzzles. I say "struggled," but that implies he cares or is trying, so maybe not. Anyway, you can dodge criticism of your terrible behavior by calling the criticism [SPOILER DELETED], but your behavior won't be any less terrible. I'm not [a variation on the spoiler] for pointing this out. Just a sentient person with a capacity for empathy. It's fun! Costs nothing! Try it out!The expression is: "virtue signaling." I kind of dislike the expression myself, but for those of you who like it, I suspect you'll like it more knowing how much it bugs the people you enjoy seeing it used against.
१४ सप्टेंबर, २०१९
"LOL white men putting [SPOILER DELETED] in the grid (10D: Sharing of a moral viewpoint to gain social approval)."
Rex Parker rails against today's NYT crossword, which features a 15-letter expression that I'll hide until the jump:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१२१ टिप्पण्या:
Ha! That’s what T Rex is doing!
It's a great term: the substitution of an appearance of virtue for real virtuous acts. It's very Darwinist: the peacock doesn't need to be fit, it just has to spread a big tail that the other peacocks have been conditioned to associate with fitness. Traditional cultures had defenses against false assertions, because when you met only a few hundred people in your life you knew who the bullshitters were. Social media culture hasn't developed those defenses yet.
Ah they are very tedious:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/09/the-week-in-pictures-dem-debate-edition.php
At least people will learn that there's only one L in "signaling". That has to count for something!
The expression is so triggering to the lefties in media because it so accurately describes their MO.
"I kind of dislike the expression myself"
I'm curious as to why. I've seen numerous people (just among people I know, let alone total strangers) share "a moral viewpoint to gain social approval." Is there a better term to express the concept?
virtue signalling is new in name only. It's the eternal social manifestation of guilt, hypocrisy and vanity that all stories are about
I just tell them, "That high horse you're on makes your ass look big."
Of course, virtue signalling is something that many religious people have been justly accused of for centuries. It is the basis of a fair amount of comedy and satire. Only the term is new; the idea is old--and I suspect Rex Parker loves the criticism when it's used against people he dislikes.
It's not a moral viewpoint. It's a denial that something that must be hidden exists.
If I say jews don't have horns growing out of their heads, I'm not virtue signalling.
If I say that races all have the same IQ, I am virtue signalling.
Great points, Roger.
""I kind of dislike the expression myself"/I'm curious as to why."
It's shorthand that hides too much. I have to stop and think about what is really meant, so it's more distracting than descriptive for me. And it feels like pissy name-calling by people who think they're superior, so the idea folds in on itself. That feels ugly, like a downward spiral of humanity.
Political correctness is about what you say. Virtue signaling is about why you say it.
He's trying to make the term "virtue signaling" politically incorrect.
It hits a nerve, I guess.
I see the term as non-partisans. Conservatives, Trumpians, Liberals, Socialists, everyone has their virtue signals.
"Of course, virtue signalling is something that many religious people have been justly accused of for centuries..."
So I wish more normal language were used. I understand and relate to the word "sanctimonious." You could say "phony piety."
Is the problem that people are insincere and don't even believe the values they express or is it that that they believe the values but only talk about them and don't do anything that's hard?
In discussion of religion, there's a real inhibition about saying people don't actually believe. This is the "sincerity" issue that's important in questions of religious freedom in law (a subject I taught for a over a decade).
It really bothers me because I think people are not honest and forthcoming about what they are really talking about when it comes to religion. It's often for the religious believer to think deeply about whether his own religion is really, truly believed in. Do you profess your religion anyway? Is it important to "witness"? But do you still self-examine and pray about whether the religion is really fundamentally there? The deepest believers (I've read) experience the "dark night of the soul." These are profound matters. Politics and social justice seem lightweight by comparison and easier to banter about, but to me, the questions of one's own beliefs are difficult, and I'm not in the mood to be a jackass about it.
Ann, how do you feel (comparatively) about the term, concept, and usage of "Conspicuous Consumption"? Say, of a person who not only wears a Rolex and uses only the latest Apple iPhone, but wants to be sure you know he's wearing and using the best (and most expensive) products available?
Ditto the question for the term "Status Symbols" ?
Would it be better to use a term like "Verblenian" (analogous to "Marxist" or "Keynesian") to describe such a pattern of group or social behavior? I'd oppose that suggestion, but I raise the possibility again for you to make comparisons.
Given, then, the tendency of people to seek social superiority via acquisition and display of material products, what term would be appropriate to describe that same tendency as applied to adoption and advocacy of particular political or moral doctrines or behaviors?
Is there, and can you point out, a less objectionable term for that real tendency?
It's not virtue that people find off-putting, it's the signaling.
Moderation in pursuit of better blog commenting is no virtue.
Signaling.
What J. Melcher said...
'Cause, damn!!
Virtue Signaling applies to more than just traditional religious sanctimony. If you don't spout the current SJW tenets you may be in 'trouble' with your fellow travelers.
In order to "prove" that you are truly victoriously correct in your adherence to the tenets of the SJW religion, people need to ostentatiously demonstrate their fidelity.
Do you recycle? Tell everyone and disparage and demean those who don't.
Drive or want to drive an "eco friendly" car? Preach it baby!!!
Vegan? Spout the mantras.
Transgender is the latest thing? Lecture anyone who doesn't kow tow to the movement. Mutilate your children to prove your faith.
Show your superiority above the common rabble,the Deplorables. It doesn't matter if you actually believe these things in your heart. It doesn't matter if you live by these rules. You MUST Signal your Virtuousness.
In most cases I don't think it matters whether the person believes, or even follows, the virtue. The just want to be one of the cool kids.
Middle school never ends.
oops that should have been virtuously correct. Damn you auto correct!
Is the problem that people are insincere and don't even believe the values they express or is it that that they believe the values but only talk about them and don't do anything that's hard?
Neither. It's about shunning and fear of being shunned.
It's about people bowing to a regime of self-righteous intolerance toward others by indicating that they are not one of those who are not to be tolerated. In the process they participate in the regime of intolerance.
Moderation in pursuit of better blog commenting is no virtue.
On the social scale, Blog Comment Moderator falls somewhere between tax collector and police spy.
"It's shorthand that hides too much."
I suppose there is a tension between efficiency and accuracy in most things.
"Is the problem that people are insincere and don't even believe the values they express or is it that that they believe the values but only talk about them and don't do anything that's hard?"
Mostly the latter, which is why the word "signaling" is so apt.
If Bob Boyd calls, tell him I'm outside with my organic English reel mower.
Guessed the term. Parker needs to get a life, or at least get out more. What a dull, bigoted man.
Althouse,
"The deepest believers (I've read) experience the 'dark night of the soul.' "
These aren't the deepest believers; they're just the believers who (a) have Eeore-style personalities, and (b) are literary types, so they leave readable writings about their experiences.
I would hasten to add regarding (a) NTTAWWT; but it's hardly the case that their trajectory is the universal human experience. Indeed the cheerful being mischaracterized as 'lightweight' is a problem of very long standing.
Consider the "WE BELIEVE" frontyard sign, a photograph of which was posted on this blog on July 14. Do "sanctimonious" and "phony piety" (both of which carry religious overtones) really capture what that sign is about as well as "virtue signaling" does? I don't think so.
tell him I'm outside with my organic English reel mower
I'm going out with a scythe to do the lawn. I do two swaths across the backyard every day.
virtue signalling
"Drive or want to drive an "eco friendly" car? Preach it baby!!!"
It's especially important that your vehicle has a plaque that claims it emits partial zeros.
"I wish more normal language were used."
"The questions of one's own beliefs are difficult, and I'm not in the mood to be a jackass about it."
Like civility bullshit. Quite willing to call others on the signaling of civility and labeling it as bullshit. Civility bullshit is a corollary to virtue signaling. Rex, the appointed "King of Crossword," does both in whining about the use of the term -- in a crossword puzzle which is supposed to be a safe space! -- hoping to make it a forbidden utterance to describe what he and his fellow travelers do. Maybe he is a true believer in that religion, but he is still signaling to his tribe that he has the virtue.
Ann Althouse said...it's more distracting than descriptive for me. And it feels like pissy name-calling by people who think they're superior,
That’s how I feel about “snowflake,” a term I hate that, when used properly, simply means that a person we don’t like is exactly what they were raised to be. It’s easily misused to also mean a person I don’t like who is complaining about something that doesn’t bother me.
Just like “you’re in denial” or “don’t get defensive,” there’s no good comeback to what is, at heart, a dodge. An ad hominem masquerading as an insight.
I find “virtue signalling” to be quite a useful term to describe a particular sort of preening and posturing that has no good equivalent.
Ann Althouse said...I wish more normal language were used. I understand and relate to the word "sanctimonious." You could say "phony piety."
But that doesn't capture it. The key to the virtue signal is that it is irrelevant to the main argument being made. It’s only purpose is to make sure the reader knows that, whatever you may think of my main point, I’m one of the good guys. I hate the same things you hate. I hold the right opinions.
“To be sure, racism is bad. I hate racism with every bone in my body. But Kanye isn’t racist just because he wears a MAGA cap.”
The virtue signal is an act of cowardice.
Announcing one's opposition to racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, fatphobia, etc. seems like a self-esteem-boosting form of virtue signaling for people who have neither accomplished anything nor helped anyone.
I am in close proximity to a great many young Democratic operatives, young liberals who volunteer to tutor children, and social justice warriors. The three groups barely overlap.
@J Melcher
Good questions.
Those are old, familiar terms which probably means they're less likely to get on my nerves.
But to me, they are clearer in what they express. They do express an opinion about what's inside other people's head. If I get an iPhone and you say I'm engaging in "conspicuous consumption," you are making a statement about why you think I did what I did and you may be wrong. If you say it about other people, you're expressing a real arrogance and presumptuousness. That could count against you. Why are you so unsympathetic to other people and so uninterested in how they really think. You're rejecting their humanity.
"These aren't the deepest believers; they're just the believers who (a) have Eeore-style personalities, and (b) are literary types, so they leave readable writings about their experiences."
Like Mother Teresa?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Night_of_the_Soul
"The term "dark night (of the soul)" in Roman Catholic spirituality describes a spiritual crisis in the journey toward union with God, like that described by St. John of the Cross. St. Thérèse of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face, OCD, a 19th-century French nun and Doctor of the Church, wrote of her own experience of the dark night. Her dark night derived from doubt of the existence of eternity, to which doubt she nonetheless did not give intellectual or volitional assent, but rather prevailed by a deepening of her Catholic faith. However, she painfully suffered through this prolonged period of spiritual darkness, even declaring to her fellow nuns: "If you only knew what darkness I am plunged into..!" While this spiritual crisis is usually temporary, it may endure for a long time. The "dark night" of St. Paul of the Cross in the 18th century endured 45 years, from which he ultimately recovered. The dark night of St. Teresa of Calcutta, whose own name in religion she selected in honor of St. Thérèse, "may be the most extensive such case on record", having endured from 1948 almost until her death in 1997, with only brief interludes of relief, according to her letters."
Virtue signaling is pulling up your skirt to show your chastity belt.
"Is the problem that people are insincere and don't even believe the values they express or is it that that they believe the values but only talk about them and don't do anything that's hard?"
It's more the latter, for me. But I also feel like there's a mob like quality to it. I'm reminded of that Seinfeld episode where Kramer refuses to wear the ribbon.
"Pharisee" is the traditional version, not "sanctimonious."
Jesus was on to the problem two thousand years ago.
Is the problem that people are insincere and don't even believe the values they express or is it that that they believe the values but only talk about them and don't do anything that's hard?
The problem is that both sincerity and degree of commitment are irrelevant from the perspective of distributed propaganda; the only thing that matters is that all the best people publicly express all the right views. The effect is that anyone who aspires to be recognized as one of the best people will learn to express those same views. It is the self-motivated public expression that begets the sincere belief and consequent committed action, not vice-versa.
Someone should tell Rex to get over himself. It's just an effing puzzle, and a fairly good one in my opinion. I have no idea why AA seeks out this drivel from such a pretentious ass.
Here's another way to put it. When you say "virtue signaling," you're sort of doing the very thing you think you're objecting to. You seem to be flaunting which side you're on and participating in an us/them view of the world.
“The manager of a fruit-and-vegetable shop places in his window, among the onions and carrots, the slogan: “Workers of the world, unite! Why does he do it? What is he trying to communicate to the world? Is he genuinely enthusiastic about the idea of unity among the workers of the world? Is his enthusiasm so great that he feels an irrepressible impulse to acquaint the public with his ideals? Has he really given more than a moments thought to how such a unification might occur and what it would mean?
I think it can safely be assumed that the overwhelming majority of shopkeepers never think about the slogans they put in their windows, nor do they use them to express their real opinions. That poster was delivered to our greengrocer from the enterprise headquarters along with the onions and carrots. He put them all into the window simply because it has been done that way for years, because everyone does it, and because that is the way it has to be. If he were to refuse, there could be trouble. He could be reproached for not having the proper decoration in his window; someone might even accuse him of disloyalty. He does it because these things must be done if one is to get along in life. It is one of the thousands of details that guarantee him a relatively tranquil life “in harmony
with society,” as they say.
"Someone should tell Rex to get over himself. It's just an effing puzzle, and a fairly good one in my opinion. I have no idea why AA seeks out this drivel from such a pretentious ass."
"Rex Parker" is a persona with a point of view and an emotive attitude — all aimed at the NYT puzzle. If you do the puzzle — and I always do — then it's fun to see what Rex says. While doing the puzzle, I might think, I'll bet Rex has something to say about that. If a "pretentious ass" — and I'm not agreeing that Rex is one — were to commit to write on a subject I engage with each day and put his pretentious assery into engagingly over-the-top, hyper-focused prose, hell, yeah, I'd want to read that.
It’s not PC to say “phony piety” so soon after the ritual national genuflection before the altar of 9/11.
I don't like "Virtue signalling" because its vague and another example of the Center-right always hitting soft. Its just another way of calling the Liberal/Left hypocrites and guess what? They don't care. The Right has been calling the Left out of their hypocrisy for 30 years - remember "Limousine Liberal"? Result? Nada.
As for the religious angle, I've never heard of that before. And don't care. Jesus was attacking phonies 2,000 years ago, and they're still here.
People were not openly racist and homophobic in the good old days.
Not even in my little hometown of 5,500 in rural Illinois back in the good ol' days of the 50s and 60s.
This is a leftist fantasized version of the past, the invention of a great struggle that never happened to fuel a contemporary desire for power.
If Meade comes back in, tell him I have a free-range Swedish reel mower with an after-market bicycle horn I've added, just in case. The horn's bulb is fairly traded, natural rubber from sustainably grown rubber trees. It's sound is guaranteed not to confuse any North American bird species.
Rex follows the Left-wing party line. Whines about "right wing language" but loves Left-wing jargon. Gee, how surprising.
Ann says: " @J Melcher Good questions. "
Thank you for engaging.
"If I get an iPhone and you say I'm engaging in "conspicuous consumption," you are making a statement about why you think I did what I did and you may be wrong. If you say it about other people, you're expressing a real arrogance and presumptuousness.
That's a good point. Using terms about (against?) individuals is different than using them about demographic groups or trends. Like "Body Mass Index" or "Intelligence Quotient" may be academically useful measures of a population sample, but useless and even harmful when applied to an individual's fitness or obesity -- or ability to master a college subject.
If that principle is agreeable to you, could we agree on the specific usage? We may say it is wrong to call Beto O'Rourke's one time, incidental, remark on firearms policy "Virtue Signaling" ( a la Ted Cruz ) because we can't read hearts and minds and understand why he said what he said. Do we also agree that people who self-identify as Democrats tend to express vigorous approval? (applause, re-tweets, quotes, paraphrases) of such remarks (send signals) intended as an affirmation of identity, and as the "goodness" of their chosen identity, intended in a group/social setting to attract like-minded, similarly identifying, desirable ("virtuous", as our class defines virtue) group-members? So the acceptable usage is that we can't fairly say Beto was virtue signaling, but we might fairly say so of the group's applause. Does that redeem the term at all?
If not, I'd still like to hear an alternative term for what either Beto, and the Democrat audience, was doing during that exchange.
When you say "virtue signaling," you're sort of doing the very thing you think you're objecting to. You seem to be flaunting which side you're on and participating in an us/them view of the world.
It is certainly true that "virtue signaling," like "sanctimony" and "false piety," can be practiced by any group along the political spectrum, even by "moderates." But that should not stop anyone on any "side" from calling out the behavior when it is encountered.
Rex says he is an empathetic person. I don’t believe him. He thinks it’s good to be king.
Melchor's scalpel is finely honed today.
It is the signaling. It is a form of shaming.
Ok, I should extend (b) to say, "or have someone skilled write about you."
Rex: Only deplorables use the term "virtue signaling." Don't use it or you might be deplorable. Amiright?
RexFans: Yay, he's one of us.
Deplorables: Fuck off, Rex. You are virtue signaling and we are calling you on your bullshit.
Althouse: Calling out virtue signaling as bullshit is uncivil and is itself virtue signaling.
Deplorables: Needs the civility bullshit tag.
For 20 years I used the term phatic speech. I always ha e to explain it. Virtue signaling is better.
Tell Bob Boyd I have the very same model only mine is sugar-free.
Veblen, not Verblen.
Narr
Compulsive editing
It's a wonder that Rex can get the strength to express any kind of opinion lying there on his fainting couch.
There are plenty of things to critique/criticize in crosswords, but his example ain't one of them.
Here is something from the L.A. Times puzzle the other day that is beyond ignorant. (And since starting to do crosswords I've learned that there are real-world right answers and crossword puzzle right answers.) --
62 Across -- Zealous crusades (six letters) . . .
Crossword answer to come . . .
Did t you like the term clapter? Don't your objections apply there?
Mark
Starts with J
When we folks at work did the puzzle at lunch, we REFUSED to put this answer in, leaving some of the spaces blank. But according to the L.A. Times, the answer for "Zealous crusades" is --
JIHADS
?????? What?????
A crusade, by the very derivation and meaning of the word (from "cross"), is Christian. And jihads are Muslim. There is no such thing as an Islamic crusade! Or of a Christian jihad!
Tell Bob Boyd I have the very same model only mine is sugar-free.
But I'll bet it requires glutes.
No one has brought up shibboleth. I don't usually think about people's sincerity.
Almost opposite time where I am to where I used to be :)
The problem is ancient. It is of course, as noted above, part of the criticism of the Pharisees.
There are ancient practices to suppress this. In Catholicism there was always a powerful tendency to keep personal public piety in check, or to make its practice painful. You see this everywhere, from the private devotional practices to art.
It is why, for instance, it has been typical for lay religious organizations to suppress individualism. The cofradias, the common local lay brotherhoods, normally act this way, their charity being collective and not publicly ascribed to individuals, and in processions this is why they wear a common costume and often cover their faces, typically those hoods that look like Klansmens attire - the Klan seems to have taken their costume from the Catholic cofradias of Louisiana.
It also distinguishes other Catholic lay organizations such as the Knights of Columbus, or the Knights of Malta. These very rarely announce their membership as individuals, unlike other non-Catholic fraternal organizations. There are no tarbooshes such as the Shriners wear.
To put a cost to faith is one reason for the function of pain, mortification, in Catholic practice. Auto-flagellation is still a thing, wearing of hair shirts or cinctures or fasting. This is a very private practice.
More public are some very painful customs, in some places, like crawling up Cathedral steps on ones knees. Usually in a place where one is a stranger, so one gets no social merit for it. Some people even have themselves crucified on Good Friday, in some places, where this is a custom. These crucified people are always pilgrims there, and are generally anonymous.
More public, identifiable acts were also typical, but they were intended to be humiliating, or setting a public standard for humiliation, such as wearing of sack-cloth, and washing paupers feet.
Pain is useful.
This is also why, traditionally, great acts of Catholic charity, buildings or art or endowments, generally don't have their individual donors names attached. The common sight, around here anyway, where donated benches or pavements or the like have plaques or inscriptions of the donors, these are opposite to Catholic practice.
"But I'll bet it requires glutes."
I am extremely fake outraged at the very suggestion!
It's gluten-free.
Natch.
In Catholicism there was always a powerful tendency to keep personal public piety in check, or to make its practice painful.
So those Madonna idol processions are what?
mine is sugar-free.
Well that's fine...if you like a skinny lawn...with cancer.
Remember when the virtue-signalers blasted W for using "crusade?"
Skinny lawns with cancer are the ONLY thing that will reverse climate change. If you don't know that, I'm afraid you haven't been paying attention.
And then of course there is the very normal, very private act of confession.
None of us are supposed to keep secrets, especially not from ourselves.
All confess, or should, and all are taught to regard themselves as sinners, in common with all other sinners.
The processions are supposed to be, and normally are collective acts with no identifiable individuals who could claim public credit. Often conducted, as I pointed out above, masked. Or if not masked, as pilgrims in places where they are unknown, or in some cases in a "sea of people" where no-one is easily identified - as in the massive one of the Black Nazarene in Manila.
When we folks at work did the puzzle at lunch, we REFUSED to put this answer in
Virtue signaling.
Folks seems to be missing one point.
It's not just the signaling of the asserted virtue as opposed to being virtuous.
It's that virtue signaling requires espousing claimed virtues that the signaled doesn't practice in real life.
Decrying global warming while flying on private jets is the best example of this.
Hypocrisy is the normal complication of public piety.
The sin of pride manifests in many ways.
One of them is making public comments on blogs :)
This is why social media is evil.
Skinny lawns with cancer are the ONLY thing that will reverse climate change.
Wrongo. The science has been resettled. A fat lawn sequesters more carbon. My lawn is morbidly obese.
Not only is my mower high in simple carbohydrates, I spread a specialty product rich in re-purposed high-fructose corn sweetener after every cutting. My lawn supplement is made from candy and soda seized from the lunch pails of wailing fat kids in public school cafeterias by their socially-conscious, engaged peers.
How about 'term of art'? That is used in law I believe but I have never seen an objection from you.
As for the "sea of people" method of anonymity - this is why I can't attend that procession of the Black Nazarene. I would stand out, and very likely be recognized besides. It's also why local politicians do not usually make a great deal of attending. Its not the done thing.
John Knox, the Scottish religious leader, had the unfortunate experience of being a galley slave. He was ransomed after a year and a half, but there he was chained to the oars for that length of time. You would think that an ex-galley slave would think that the institution of slavery, especially as practiced on galleys, a reprehensible practice and that he would preach against it. No, Knox is not known as an abolitionist. He is chiefly remembered today for his fulminations against Mary, the reigning queen in Scotland. He thought that the word of God and the common experience of humanity argued against such an abomination as being ruled by a female. That was the virtue he signaled, practiced, and preached.....The term obknoxious entered the language from people who wearied of his misogyny, but it just goes to show you how one era's virtue is another era's vice.
It's that virtue signaling requires espousing claimed virtues that the signaled doesn't practice in real life.
I don't see that that is required, it's just more fun to point out when it happens.
Skinny lawns with cancer are the ONLY thing that will reverse climate change
So why isn't your mower solar-powered?
"So why isn't your mower solar-powered?"
Because it's powered by family(not factory)-farmed native jumping worms. (Available through the Althouse Amazon portal.)
I think it's a beautiful little phrase that conveys exactly what it intends to: One is trying to only appear virtuous, not by doing anything that is actually virtuous, thus 'signaling'. Low- to no-cost Instavirtue.
This was nailed at least 2,000 years ago in Mathew 6:1-16.
Our old lawn mower was boy-powered.
No lawn anymore, so no problem!
Wow! Look at the virtues on Rex! Give that boy some extra pronouns!
And when I say family(not factory)-farmed native jumping worms, I mean family(not factory)-farmed homeless native rescue jumping worms. Saving the planet. One homeless jumping worm at a time.
Jumping worm mowers are too noisy if you ask me.
Lots of people who do not believe that an immortal being arranged to have a son so he could torture him to death in order to expiate a sin he had himself created still believe that religion serves a valuable public purpose and should not be analyzed too deeply unless it becomes truly pernicious. Like Islam.
Rex provides a fine example of it in that passage.
You know, reading that again, it's kind of over the top. I don't know Rex like you do, but it strikes me that he is rather ostentatiously conveying a message about his own moral superiority. To coin a phrase.
Is Rex trolling us? Beware the self-referential!
Mine wear tiny little worm mufflers.
Made out of kale.
Can I get a comfort worm through The Portal?
I consider Orange Man Bad announcements to be virtue-signaling and don't see any insincerity necessary. It isn't dishonesty when you're a true believer.
I think 'phoney' is the word wanted by many of you.
When we folks at work did the puzzle at lunch, we REFUSED to put this answer in
Virtue signaling.
I don't know about virtue, but it was certainly a signal made with the finger between our ring and index fingers.
And we really showed them. I'll bet the folks at L.A. Times now will think twice the next time they think about posting a doltish answer like that again.
Plus, fastening and unfastening all those little harnesses is so time consuming.
And what happens when the lead worm dies? You have to break in a new one, the mower wanders and the appearance of your lawn suffers. Everyone in the neighborhood knows you lost another lead worm and they start to wonder if you really care about your worms and if there was something you might be doing differently, could the death have been prevented?
Then you start to wonder the same thing. Pretty soon you're second guessing yourself in the worm barn. I think the worms pick up on that vibe. They see it as weakness and they're more likely to turn on you.
And once the worm has turned ...
That's why I keep a trained lean and hungry round of robins in the old sheep shed. Just in case.
Mayonnaise will do that too, if you let it out of the fridge.
Rumblings in the worm barn. Fear of a worm Spartacus. Face it, Meade, it's brutal, violent animal slavery. And all for that emaciated, cancer-eaten old lot rug you call a lawn. For shame!
Althouse said "That feels ugly, like a downward spiral of humanity."
Much of social media feels and is ugly, but that ugliness isn't new, it's tribal. We've tried to ameliorate our baser human instincts with social taboos and the rule of law, but they are always simmering just under the facade of civilization.
Virtue signaling via social media gives one power over others at no cost to oneself, a form of power that will always be misused. One expects the younger online cohort to rail against the norm, it's part of the process of maturing into adulthood, but watching successful middle-aged people keening for approval is off putting.
Rex’s virtue signaling is tedious.
buwaya said...
Hypocrisy is the normal complication of public piety.
The sin of pride manifests in many ways.
One of them is making public comments on blogs :)
9/14/19, 10:32 AM
Good one.
Give Rex this much credit: he’s not merely virtue signaling, he’s meta-virtue-signaling, that is, virtue signaling about using the term “virtue signaling” to call out virtue signaling.
Transgender is the latest thing? Lecture anyone who doesn't kow tow to the movement. Mutilate your children to prove your faith.
Transgender has been trendy and full of pride across the rainbow spectrum for nearly a century. However, progress of indoctrination and wielding the double-edges scalpel occurred in the second era of transgender adventurism with the liberalization of the medical oath, following establishment of the Pro-Choice quasi-religion.
Then, of course, normalization of reproductive rites, human sacrifice, planned child, or wicked solution, in the pursuit of wealth, pleasure, leisure, narcissistic indulgence, and, coincidentally, taxation and greenness (e.g. population control), for social justice and other purposes.
Sanctimonious doesn't cut it. To take Hardins examples I can sanctimoniously refute antisemitic myths and it is still not Virtue signaling. It requires the knowing suppression of truth or belief to count as Virtue signaling.
"Virtue signalling" is a concise, descriptive and derisive phrase. Sure it's overused, but no more so than others in internet parlance. As suggested earlier, there is a tribal element to it. There is an "us" and there is a "them". Each group believes strongly in the validity of their convictions. I'm strongly conservative and I know many people who are strongly not conservative. I don't demonize them for their beliefs, but I sure wish they'd shut up.
"you're expressing a real arrogance and presumptuousness. That could count against you. Why are you so unsympathetic to other people and so uninterested in how they really think. You're rejecting their humanity."
No. Thorstein Veblen didn't reject anyone's humanity. He recognized it for what it was.
My daughter's boyfriend is a very liberal young man (raised by very liberal parents, not surprisingly). My daughter finds the architecture of plantation style homes to be attractive. They are planning a trip to Alabama next year and she'd like to take a tour of said architecture. He won't go with her... because "slavery".
Her: I wish Cedarburg were more multi-cultural.
Me: No, you don't.
Her: Yes, I do. Cedarburg is so mono-culturally white. I wish it was more culturally diverse.
Me: I lived in Brown Deer the better part of my life. You want culturally diverse? For the next month, I challenge you to do all of your grocery shopping at the Pick-n-Save in Brown Deer, instead of Outpost in Mequon and Sendik's in Grafton. Pro-tip: don't point out to the POC with overflowing carts that they're in the 12 items or less checkout aisle, or that they're illegally parked in a handicapped parking spot.
Her:
Me: Well, do you agree to my challenge?
Her: No.
Me: Ah, I see, you claim to want more cultural diversity, but when offered a solution to experience what you claim you want, you refuse. I think your statement to want more cultural diversity is so that you can hear yourself say it, and have other people hear you say it, just to feel better about yourself, even though you don't mean it. You're virtue signaling.
I think perhaps an element of what is derided by the term "virtue signaling" is precisely the belief that virtue consists in experiencing the proper emotions, and is a good in itself, independent of its consequences. If you anonymously send money to someone who needs it, you have practiced the virtue of charity, presumably because you experience empathy. If you do it publicly, you have practiced it, but your motivations are less clear. When you say that you intend to vote to have someone else forced to do it, you are signaling that you experience the proper emotions, while demonstrating that you do not.
Is this thing still alive?
Nothing new about virtue-signaling, any more than political correctness is new. Isn't any marker-- rhetorical-virtual or physical -- a signal of virtue of some sort? A woman may wear a hijab, or a crucifix, or a red ribbon, or a Hilary button, understanding and being understood as making a statement of preference for a certain virtue, and being in solidarity with certain virtuous tendencies.
Same-same for us guys. The fact is we can't help but signal with our choices of symbology and dress; it's our nature, and to interpret signals even moreso.
Narr
Means of transmission change, but signaling will always be with us
Did any of the commenters SAY that they were white, and a man? How could he be certain?
Jupiter said...
If you anonymously send money to someone who needs it, you have practiced the virtue of charity, presumably because you experience empathy. If you do it publicly, you have practiced it, but your motivations are less clear.
From
https://whitneyhess.com/blog/2009/02/18/maimonides-eight-levels-of-charity-applied-to-building-your-personal-brand/
Maimonides’ Eight Levels of Charity
Level 8 — The donor is pained by the act of giving
Level 7 — The donor gives less than he should but does so cheerfully
Level 6 — The donor gives after being solicited
Level 5 — The donor gives without being solicited
Level 4 — The recipient knows the donor but the donor does not know the recipient
Level 3 — The donor knows the recipient but the recipient does not know the donor
Level 2 — Neither the donor nor the recipient knows the other
Level 1 — The donor gives the recipient the wherewithal to become self-supporting
No one can honestly say “WE BELIEVE “. I know what I believe, but I can’t guarantee that anyone agrees with me, and I can’t force anyone to believe. I believe we can all agree on that.
Also, I didn’t know that “virtue signaling” was necessarily a leftist phenomenon, but I have noticed a lot of it coming from leftists. At least now I know another way to trigger them.
Rex Parker should submit his rant to #AmITheAsshole.
Because he is.
I'm not a fan of virtue signaling but I like it when it's done by Drew Brees.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा