Yet, it's not nearly as tiring as as people accusing other people of "force[ing] gender and identity based virtue signalling."

Especially since accusing others of virtue signalling is, itself, a form of [virtue] signalling - https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=42280

This doesn't make any sense as one of these is logically less in volume than the other one, since it's just a reaction to the first virtue signaling. It's probably more tiring to you because you post stuff like that a lot.

It makes sense because the latter is by definition a form of virtue signaling while the former is just presumed to be.

Virtue signaling involves intent, so a person pointing out something is, say, misogynistic might do it because they are really concerned about the topic and it's the way they feel, even taking the risk of an unpopular opinion. Whereas someone denouncing them for virtue signaling is overtly engaging in virtue signaling, i.e. publicly proclaiming their distaste or disinterest to the topic.

Unlike the first case, there is no larger public interest the denouncer claims to protect.

>It's probably more tiring to you because you post stuff like that a lot.

Nope, I absolutely do not, nobody in my life has ever accused me of virtue signalling or even implied it. Try again.