[scoutt]

On the other side, being told what is "bad", what is "good", "right" and wrong", what is "dark" and what is "bright", what I should do and think and why I don't have such good morals, in the past 15 years, was so exhausting...

[Lendal]

Don't worry about it. It's an opinion. Agree or disagree with it. But to feel morally inferior because of someone else's opinion isn't an argument. It's revealing that you have issues with self esteem. If you want to put forth an argument about why he's wrong, or crossing a line, or making an unrealistic proposition that everyone everywhere should stop using a word or phrase, that's absolutely a valid response. But people making the claim of "virtue signalling" are not making an argument. They're making a baseless ad hominem attack.

[scoutt]

I did ctrl+f searching for "opinion", "I believe", "I think", etc. I can't find any reference to "opinions".

I read the post as the author decribing facts and imparting instructions of what we should do ("It's time to do X", "The cargo cult metaphor should be avoided") because they believe their knowledge/opinions/morals/beliefs are better than mine, and somehow they can dictate what to do; how should I feel, what should I think.

Otherwise I am oppressing, contributing to oppress, perpetuating something, [insert other accusations].

As in the past 15 years. It's enough already.

The real question is why the author is doing this? Is it ego? Money? Clicks? Pure and true altruism?

And here "virtue signalling" comes as a possible valid answer too.

[Gerardo1]

People should be advocating for their own values and morals. To be an ethical person is to understand your values and do the work to apply them in your everyday life.

[scoutt]

Pablo Escobar could have said what you wrote as well.

[prmoustache]

People have been doing that since the dawn of humanity.