no toys please

In article , Sarah Vaughan says...

Banty wrote:
In article , Sarah Vaughan says...
Banty wrote:
In article , Sarah Vaughan says...
[...]
But since neither of us have a crystal ball or ESP capacity, how can we be sure
what's dumped on us vs. what's just a 'miss'?
[...]
Well again, how do you know?
[...]
OK I can understand in view of your clarification (it shouldn't have to be
implied that it's *new*), but again, how do you know?
Most of the time, you wouldn't. I'm honestly not sure what your point
is here. Is it supposed to be OK that someone acted deceptively as long
as you never get to find out about it?

But what would be deceptive about it if someone doesn't take your view that
gifts have to be from some kind of effort and sacrifice? Not everyone does. I
wonder if it would even be a majority.

Seems to me that if someone's trying to make a gift look like something
they got specially, then that's because they think it ought to be
something they got specially. Otherwise, why on earth not just do the
obvious thing and be honest up front about what they're doing? "Hey,
someone got me this wallet I can't use, but it looks like something
you'd like. Want it?" (Apart from the whole subtle thing of underlying
messages, there are also some practical advantages for the recipient in
this approach; they can say straight out if it's *not* something they
want rather than simply getting stuck with their own useless item that
they want to get rid of, and they don't have to write a thank-you note
unless it's obviously been a big deal for the giver to get the item to
them.)

What I'm finding bizarre, and what's making me uncomfortable, is this
whole idea that you shouldn't tell the recipient that you're passing on
something you can't use rather than getting something specially, that
you should try to make it look as though you did get something specially
even though you didn't.

But the *point* is, there's no requirement that the gift have been bought
*specially* to begin with.


[...]
The more I think about it, the less sense it makes. I really do think you're
looking for something more on the lines of homage.

No, I'm looking for something more on the lines of honesty. I don't
want to be unwrapping a present and thinking "Wow, this is great, this
person must have been to some trouble specially..." if those feelings
are a lie. If I was looking for homage, then I would be expecting
everyone to go to that trouble of getting me a present specifically.
But I've said repeatedly that that isn't the case, that if someone just
chooses not to get me anything full stop then that's fine as long as
they don't try to make it look as though they've got me something when
in fact they haven't. I guess there's no way I can get you to believe
that I'm telling the truth about that if that's not what you want to
believe.

Again, there's no dishonesty about it. It's in your mind that the gift needed
to have been bought specially.

What do you think of gifts, like I described, picked up on travel? Several of
different items because they're very appealing, but no particular designation?
There's nothing rude about that either.

You might argue that all gifts need to be bought specially, with specific
separate effort and specifically for the intended recipient, but it makes no
sense to say someone has been dishonest about it if they see no such
requirement. They're presenting you with a gift, not a 'specially bought with
you in mind every minute of the way' thing.

Banty

Sarah Vaughan wrote:

Rosalie B. wrote:
Sarah Vaughan wrote:

Hmmm... I have to say that I find this whole idea that someone *might*
be pretending the gift was new and that they should avoid making it
obvious that it's not pretty bizarre.
[...]
I don't think most people look at gifts like that. I don't, and I would not
expect anyone who gets a gift from me to do so. I would expect a person that I
regifted to be glad if it was ALSO for my benefit that I was getting rid of
something that I didn't need or want. If I saw signs that they were so greedy
as to want something that was bought new then they wouldn't be getting any more
gifts from me.

Rosalie, I've specified over and over again since my first post in this
subthread that

a) I don't care whether or not someone buys me something new, or even
specially (not the same as new) - if they don't want to get me a present
at all, that's fine by me

I don't think that many people (especially children) who would say
they didn't care whether or not they got a present. (DH always says
he doesn't care and we shouldn't get him presents, but I think he
would be disappointed if we ignored him on his birthday)

Because you see there are a LOT of occasions and a LOT of people when
not giving a present is NOT AN OPTION. It isn't about you and what
you would like. It is about occasions for gift giving where one does
not get to chose NOT to give a gift.

and

b) I'm entirely happy for someone to pass on something that they can't
use if it's something I might like.

I don't think a parent would say to a child on his/her birthday - well
I love you, but I couldn't find anything to buy, but maybe you would
like this game that your sister got for her birthday. If it is a
pass-along, it isn't a gift and doesn't fulfill the gift giving
obligation of the occasion.

The ONLY thing I'm objecting to is the thought that someone might
deliberately try to make something that they want to get rid of look
like something they bought specially for me (rather than simply saying
"Hey, I've got such-and-such that I can't use - you want it?").

And I object to your idea that someone needs to get something
specially for you or the recipient. (not "buy" - 'get')

I've drawn a distinction between these different issues all the way
along the discussion, but people keep ignoring this and talking as
though my issue is with the person choosing not to buy me something new,
regardless of how often I clarify that that isn't it and I really don't
*care* about that. I truly don't know any way to make that distinction
any clearer than I've already made it.

I am quite clear about that.

But gift giving is normally about an occasion. And whatever the
source of the gift - whether it was something in my stash of age
appropriate gifts that I have on hand for children's birthday parties,
or whether I ran out to TRU and got something - it isn't always or
only JUST the thought that counts.

There ARE times when a gift should be something chosen with care for
the person it is given to. And some people will manage the choosing
well. But some people are lousy choosers, even when they have good
intentions, and the gifts miss the mark. I've forgotten who it was
who told the story about her MIL and a picture frame that she pulled
from her closet - that person was clearly a person who didn't chose
well, but a picture frame is a useful gift that almost anyone can use,
and the MIL wanted the DIL to have a gift.

When I re gift, I do it because I want the person I give the gift to
to have that gift. When my MIL gave me a nightgown that was so much
the wrong size that I could not possibly wear it, I put it aside to
give to someone (and I still have it because I haven't found a person
that I thought it was appropriate to give it to). In any case the
gift is chosen for that person by me from things I have on hand that
are too good to throw away.

IMHO, one has to give the gift giver the benefit of the doubt and
assume that they want the giftee to have a gift. That is the only
thing that the giftee needs to know - not whether the gift was chosen
specially - just that the giver wanted the giftee to have a gift and
went to the trouble to get it to them.

Of course some people are just nasty people and will give a gift to
make a point or hurt someone. Maybe that is what you have in mind -
someone that you thought cared for you disappointed you because you
found out that they didn't get it specially for you.

"enigma" wrote in message
. ..
Banty wrote in
:

Back to birthday parties, with all the parties, and the
common interests between kids, it's really easy to save
party gifts that miss the mark for another birthday party.
A toy truck is a toy truck, and many little boys like them.

yup, or it's easy enough to donate them to Toys For Tots
campaigns or those Pick-a-Child Holiday gift tree things.
we don't have any Disney in my house, but it's not up to me
to say "no Disney crap" on an invite. *my* job is to teach my
kid not to say "ewwwww! Disney!" when he opens the gift...
lots of people love Disney. it's easy to regift.
now those Veggie Tales.... anyone have kids who won't eat
veggies because they don't want to eat their 'friends'?
lee

LOL-We went to see relatives for DD's 1st birthday who had never seen
her-the result being that almost every single gift was for a baby-as in,
more like newborn, not a 1 yr old. Luckily, her birthday is so near
Christmas that I could easily drop the whole kit and kaboodle in the Toys
for Tots box 500 miles away, very confident that I'd never get "caught".

Doesn't work as well now-if she opens it, she wants to play with it. We did
pass on a few duplicates that way, though. Somewhere there is some lucky
toddler who has a fisher-price zoo because DD had two relatives who were
convinced she needed one.