Does "no presents" really mean that?

In article , H Schinske wrote:
Kat ) wrote:

Yes, all of the other moms brought food in addition to the gifts. Yet these
were not "little" gifts as you mention, but ones that I guess were in the
$20 - $30 dollar range.

Egads. That's *way* more than I ever spend on the gifts my kids take. Our limit
is $10 or so. And that's for parties where gifts *are* expected.

Birthday presents at parties run quite a range of different prices
around here. We generally spend about $15 for a present for a
birthday party our 7-year-old son is invited to, but have gone higher
on occasion, when we saw a particularly suitable present for a close
friend.

At our son's most recent birthday party, he got presents varying in
price from $0 (a nicely drawn picture of a volcano, fitting the theme
of the party) to a $20? action figure that only the child who gave it has
subsequently played with and which has already been moved to the
"garage-sale" pile by our son, something that rarely happens. (The
volcano picture was saved in the same cleanup---this decision was
based on how much he valued the items, not based on his liking for
the two givers.)

--
Kevin Karplus http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~karplus
life member (LAB, Adventure Cycling, American Youth Hostels)
Effective Cycling Instructor #218-ck (lapsed)
Professor of Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz
Undergraduate and Graduate Director, Bioinformatics
Affiliations for identification only.

In article GNrOa.3939$H17.3106@sccrnsc02,
"Byron Canfield" wrote:

"Elizabeth Gardner" wrote in message
...
In article vP9Oa.56185$926.6971@sccrnsc03,
"Byron Canfield" wrote:

I suspect Miss Manners has not quite grasped the era of the Birthday
Gift
Registry. If that is an indication that the rules have changed since
Miss
Manners' time...



Miss Manners' time is now. Her POV, I think, would be that just because
tacky phenomena like gift registries exist, that doesn't make them
correct. I've personally given in to the concept of bridal registries,
both as a bride and as a gift giver, because the general idea of wedding
presents (if one chooses to give them) is to help the happy couple
outfit their new establishment and it seems like a practical approach
because it helps the giver determine what's most needed. But what's the
deal with birthday registries? To help kids fill out their toy
collection? I don't see any need to foster their greed further. Or to
relieve their friends of the requirement to put some thought into gift
selection.

I'm not defending birthday registries -- I think they are very near the
height of presumptiousness. I was just making the observation that Miss
Manners' opinion and the current reality do not match.



It's not the job of etiquette experts to match their directives to the
times, just as it's not the job of grammar experts to accept every
variation in language that happens to come along. "Between you and I"
is endemic, but it's still not correct, and there are good reasons why
it isn't, having to do with the underlying structure of English.
Likewise with the rule about "no presents" on an invitation: the
underlying analysis (which others have laid out in this thread) still
leads to the indisputable conclusion that it's tacky, for the same
reason that birthday registries are tacky.

Miss Manners grasps the era just fine; she just doesn't approve of it in
this instance.

Elizabeth Gardner writes:
Likewise with the rule about "no presents" on an invitation: the
underlying analysis (which others have laid out in this thread) still
leads to the indisputable conclusion that it's tacky

When people dispute it, it's not indisputable.

for the same reason that birthday registries are tacky.

The former is (or can be) motivated by dislike for getting presents.
The latter is motivated by wanting people to get you stuff. I can't see
how the two could be farther apart.

David desJardins

One thing that's not been mentioned yet:

Is it possible that the other mothers that were invited brought gifts because
they didn't like the fact that the mother was dictating that her CHILD didn't
need any gifts, instead of it being a request by a person for their own self?

- Blanche

In article ,
David desJardins wrote:

Elizabeth Gardner writes:
Likewise with the rule about "no presents" on an invitation: the
underlying analysis (which others have laid out in this thread) still
leads to the indisputable conclusion that it's tacky

When people dispute it, it's not indisputable.

It is if you accept the underlying analysis. You may dispute the
underlying analysis if you like, though it won't change anything. While
etiquette evolves along with society, nothing in the march of technology
or the cataclysmic social changes of the past 50 years has affected this
particular rule, keenly though makers of toys and giftware wish it had,
and hard though they try to make people believe it has.


for the same reason that birthday registries are tacky.

The former is (or can be) motivated by dislike for getting presents.
The latter is motivated by wanting people to get you stuff. I can't see
how the two could be farther apart.



True, the motivations are opposite, but their effect in the context of a
party invitation (and their place in the pantheon of impolite behavior)
is, ironically, identical. If you write "no presents, please" on an
invitation, the implication is that if you hadn't written it, the
recipient would have had an obligation to bring a gift. If you put the
location of your birthday registry on the invitation, it makes the
obligation explicit. Either way, it violates a basic tenet of
etiquette, which is that gift-giving is at the option of the giver, and
that the receiver is not allowed to either ask for or decline to receive
gifts. The birthday registry is marginally worse, in that the
recipient is not only assuming gifts, but specifying which ones.

I understand the desperation of moms who put "no presents" on an
invitation. I would like to do something similar wth my husband's
sisters, who always go overboard at Christmas with too many toys
composed of too many little tiny plastic pieces. But I haven't been
able to think of a polite way to ask them to rein it in and that's
because there is no polite way. My only hope is that someday he might
take it up with them as an intra-family matter, where different rules
apply. If they lived nearer by and we saw them often, I might be able
to do it myself, but as it is, we don't have that kind of relationship.

We kept birthday presents in check last year by limiting the size of the
party.

Elizabeth Gardner wrote:
True, the motivations are opposite, but their effect in the context of a
party invitation (and their place in the pantheon of impolite behavior)
is, ironically, identical. If you write "no presents, please" on an
invitation, the implication is that if you hadn't written it, the
recipient would have had an obligation to bring a gift.

I'm still waiting for someone to give a good sound reason why this is
true. So far, it's been merely asserted. I know that's not what I
would mean, were I to write such a thing on my child's birthday
invitations. I would mean, instead, that while the guest would
otherwise have had the option to bring a gift, they are now being asked
not to bring one. Of course, David said this some time ago, and no one
answered then, but continued to repeat this thing about presuming that
gifts are normally expected. That's just wrong.

So while I agree with Miss Manners and others that gifts should not be
expected, I think it's an error in logic to conclude that asking others
not to bring gifts is poor etiquette.

I understand the desperation of moms who put "no presents" on an
invitation. I would like to do something similar wth my husband's
sisters, who always go overboard at Christmas with too many toys
composed of too many little tiny plastic pieces. But I haven't been
able to think of a polite way to ask them to rein it in and that's
because there is no polite way.

That, to me, indicates that there's something wrong with the concept of
"polite" that is leading you to that conclusion. If you were expecting
someone to go out of their way to help you, that would be rude. If
you're expecting someone NOT to go out of their way to make your life
more difficult, that's perfectly reasonable. A concept of manners that
indicates that you shouldn't inform them that they are causing you
problems is a bit strange.

We kept birthday presents in check last year by limiting the size of the
party.

Which is wrong. Parents shouldn't be forced with a choice between not
inviting someone or having a pile of flashy toys for gifts.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

In ,
David desJardins wrote:

*Elizabeth Gardner writes:
* Likewise with the rule about "no presents" on an invitation: the
* underlying analysis (which others have laid out in this thread) still
* leads to the indisputable conclusion that it's tacky
*
*When people dispute it, it's not indisputable.
*
* for the same reason that birthday registries are tacky.
*
*The former is (or can be) motivated by dislike for getting presents.
*The latter is motivated by wanting people to get you stuff. I can't see
*how the two could be farther apart.

BOTH are things that happen only because the person who makes them happen
is assuming that other people are going to bring presents. It is that
underlying assumption which is considered tacky (although for a child's
birthday party, it's not, really, even according to Miss Manners, if I
remember correctly - young kids' parties are, like showers, expected
gifting occasions, right?)

--
hillary israeli vmd http://www.hillary.net
"uber vaccae in quattuor partes divisum est."
not-so-newly minted veterinarian-at-large

Hillary Israeli writes:
The former is (or can be) motivated by dislike for getting presents.
The latter is motivated by wanting people to get you stuff. I can't
see how the two could be farther apart.

BOTH are things that happen only because the person who makes them happen
is assuming that other people are going to bring presents.

People keep saying this, but it's still not true. Even if I think
there's only a 1% chance that someone might bring a present, I might
still specifically ask people not to bring presents, because I want to
reduce the chance further. It's just not at all reasonable or logical
to say that, if I ask for something not to happen, implies that if I
hadn't made that request, then it would have happened or would have been
obligatory.

If I say to my child, "Don't go into the street," does that imply that
the child would otherwise have been required to run into the street?
This seems ridiculous.

David desJardins

Elizabeth Gardner writes:
If you write "no presents, please" on an invitation, the implication
is that if you hadn't written it, the recipient would have had an
obligation to bring a gift.

You keep saying this, but it's simply not true. It doesn't imply that
at all.

If you put the location of your birthday registry on the invitation,
it makes the obligation explicit. Either way, it violates a basic
tenet of etiquette, which is that gift-giving is at the option of the
giver, and that the receiver is not allowed to either ask for or
decline to receive gifts.

Certainly, if there's a rule against declining to receive gifts, then
requesting that people not bring gifts violates that rule. That *is*
indisputable. However, I think the rule of etiquette that allows you to
force unwanted gifts upon me is what's "tacky", not my polite request
that you not do so.

We kept birthday presents in check last year by limiting the size of
the party.

Don't you think that it's sad that these rules of "etiquette" are
preventing you from inviting friends to your party? Is that really the
purpose of etiquette: to constrain people's ability to enjoy themselves?

David desJardins

The thing is, you would never write "no presents" on an invitation unless
there were an underlying assumption that without such notation, presents
would be brought. It would be rude of a host to make that assumption.

Except that, I believe that, even according to ettiquette mavens, the two
events where presents ARE "expected" are showers (wedding/baby/whatever) and
children's birthday parties.
And yes, if I wrote 'no gifts' on my child's party invites, I would expect the
guests to honor that. (And, if they DID feel strongly moved to give my child a
gift, to do it away from the party, so as not to embarrass other attendees who
had not brought gifts.)

..
Naomi
CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator

(either remove spamblock or change address to to e-mail
reply.)