• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    No, it’s saying they’re doing something mostly superficial and useless because they think it will make people see them as virtuous, where they wouldn’t have done it if it wasn’t a highly visible act, not that the actions are actually virtuous. So like someone volunteers for one day for some charitable cause, but spends the whole time taking selfies and not actually helping much.

    That said I’m not sure what the logic is that quitting facebook counts as this

    • @finitebanjo
      link
      English
      3
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Alright but the highly superficial act is seen as virtuous. The act we oppose when we use this phrase. That act. It is virtuous. Therefor we in this hypothetical stand against virtue and goodness.

      • @PumaStoleMyBluff
        link
        English
        3
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        It generally means that we don’t believe they’d be taking that action if there weren’t a camera rolling or trending hashtag to follow. It’s not criticizing the actual action, but the context around the action.

        • @finitebanjo
          link
          English
          031 minutes ago

          Yeah cool but that doesnt argue any of my points whatsoever.

          • @PumaStoleMyBluff
            link
            English
            024 minutes ago

            We’re agreeing that the individual act is virtuous. You’re not understanding that complaints of virtue signaling are not criticizing the individual act. They’re criticizing the unspoken lack of other acts.

            • @finitebanjo
              link
              English
              018 minutes ago

              Yeah cool cool cool, its an admission to fault to use the term we agree.