I love making gifts to people, without expecting anything in return, but still wondered why it sometimes seemed to drive people away. That's why the "Law of Reciprocity"[0][1] never sat right with me while I experienced more personal anecdotal evidence for the reverse phenomenon [2].
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocity_(social_psychology...
I don't consider gifts as the items solely. The person who brought the gift spent some time pondering what would I like, gave his/her best shot. Spent time and funds to acquire this and gave it to me.
Yes, it might not be the exact item I'd get; yes, it might not be crazy expensive (or just flat out cheap and simple). But it's a small anchor which makes me remember the person who gave me the gift and the occasion. The thoughtfulness and kindness what makes a gift, a gift.
That gift is priceless for me from now on. It can be a mug, it can be a pin, it can be a watch, or anything.
Putting everything on a material perspective is just not very kind, and is a great disservice to the person who bought the gift.
Items of low value, carefully selected, actually work really well for gifts! I think the process of curation can dramatically increase their perceived value, compared to a "serious" gift. But at some point, you just have too much stuff of all kinds, and you have to start getting rid of it.
Have a 75-year old friend that thought exactly like this and because of it, her house ended up being cluttered with tons of cat trinkets that she didn't want because her coworkers happen to find out "she likes cats". So she had cat figurines, cat pot holders, cat pins, cat stuffed toys, cat Christmas ornaments, etc. Decades of accumulated stuff like that. The items were things she didn't enjoy and would never buy herself but she hung on to them because of the cultural meme of "it's the thought that counts!" being beat into her head. She's not an assertive person so it wasn't in her personality to tell people to "stop getting me cat things" -- so she just smiled and thanked them. And because she felt "obligated" to the thoughtfulness and memory of the giver, she felt compelled to keep everything and constantly relocate them to the next house when she had to move. She didn't know what to do with all of it and it didn't feel right to her to throw it all away.
I finally convinced her to just put all the accumulated gifts on Craigslist as a "free giveaway". This was the psychological breakthrough she needed because she knew whoever would come get them would actually want the items. She finally was able to de-clutter her house.
I was only able to give her that advice because 99% of the gifts I received just created clutter in my house and my brain.
>, and is a great disservice to the person who bought the gift.
As counterpoint, buying a gift can be a disservice to the recipient as you've now added a destructive mental loop in their brain that has to figure out how to reconcile the giver's generosity with an unwanted item.
The above situation makes me wonder if society needs a total re-think of gifting etiquette where only very close family relations exchange gifts such as husbands/wives and parents/children.
For lesser relations like coworkers, the counterintuitive thinking that can make life better: not buying a gift is "the gift of not forcing the recipients to expend mental energy about that unwanted item later in life".
My friend did enjoy giftcards from Starbucks. She likes coffee and it didn't clutter up the house. The problem with gift cards is that many think it's too vulgar (or "low effort") because it's a thin veneer over cash. Understandable. But that's also why she keeps getting "real gifts" she doesn't want.
In my experience "I don't give gifts because gift giving isn't efficient and here's a study proving my point" isn't conducive to fostering friendships.
If the people you hang out with think cat trinkets or socks are good gifts, I get why you became so jaded to it. Becoming the person that can give such gifts that are in the categories you appreciate, and cultivating friendships with others that do the same is way better approach in my view than just walking away from gift giving as a whole.
That is essentially gifting them your time and honestly I appreciate the company more than trinkets
I also tend to give out worn out or very old gifts to people who appreciate them. It's not easy as writing for me, too, but I know the real dangers of having an unintended hoarder's den.
On the other side of the equation, if my friend tells me that buying them these gifts creates mental load and clutter in their life, I'd listen. I'd instead gift experiences and/or expendables (e.g. gift cards), if he/she accepts.
I think these matters can be discussed, and it will certainly improve the friendship and the relationship between two parties.
If I can get enough information about people, I'd buy them what they like. This can be socks, gift cards, or just a box of chocolate.
I don't wish my gifts become burdens or pain points in one's life. I'd also not get offended if someone gives away something I gifted.
Being human and good relations is rooted in communication. No need to put this into hard molds and make people miserable by projecting our values over others under nice names. I buy gifts to make people smile. If I can learn what makes you smile most, I'll get that one. If not getting one will make you smile, I'll get you none.
Except when someone is in need of material things, I think he was right
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/14/man-accidental...
"The flight had been a gift from colleagues and the man felt he couldn’t refuse."
But even that can trip up people who like to keep stuff in pristine condition. I think there would be a market for products that come in a "open" state - the cover torn off, a fake outer seal broken, 3 chocolate slots empty ("eaten") etc. so they can be more suitable for hoarders.
Similar story with wine. Someone went to the effort of buying me a bottle that you can't get in USA from my home country and it was really special.
Buying something is transactional, but making something takes effort. My $1.30 cents of clay to make each knock-off baby Yoda figure one year was a huge hit compared to the $300-400 for some other themed item on Etsy.
Gifts from an employer are kind of blah to me as well. You’re spending money you could have given me but think you know better, because it’s tax deductible.
Apple crap is basically cash. I was able to sell it for sticker price within the week.
FYI, while I do not think this (or any) deduction should exist, this is only $25 per year for non cash or non cash equivalent gifts:
https://www.irs.gov/faqs/small-business-self-employed-other-...
There's "I remember you and I want to show that I care about you" gifts.
These days, I'm ambivalent about such gifts, whether it's giving them or accepting them. It's not the love I'm ambivalent about, it's just that it's also usually a ... thing. Which takes up space.
But there are also "Man, you've got to see this!" gifts. Not just something that the receiver will like, but which the giver loves also. Things that grow what you have in common.
These gifts need familiarity and trust. If the giver isn't on the same wavelength as the receiver, it becomes a "this is your sort of thing, isn't it?" gift instead, and they are not the same, even when they hit the mark.
And of course, a "you've got to see this" gift from a stanger is just a promotional sample. There has to be familiarity already, otherwise it's an imposition. "Why did you think I wanted to be more like you?"
My brother is the one who most usually gives the good "you've got to see this" gifts to me, and I dare hope I've managed to give some back.
That's a hell of an assumption to make. There's a very real chance they spent 2 seconds buying something last minute because they were obligated to buy you something! I see my girlfriend do it every Christmas.
That's a hell of an assumption to make. In my family we negotiate what we going to buy for every member for at least two weeks, taking account what they are going to like and what they actually need, amongst other criteria.
Any friend of mine and my wife also gets the same treatment, as far as I experienced.
BTW, nobody is obliged to buy me anything for any day. I'm perfectly OK with that.
I agree with you re: thoughtful gifts given to (or received from} people you have a relationship with. But I dont cosider employer gifts in this category. I view employee-employee gifts EXACTLY how the parent does. They tend to be impersonal (especially when given to the whole office) junk that gets forgotten, passed on or resold.
I'm also from an Asian background where cash is more acceptable. I feel any other form of gifting is a ruse to increase consumerism, i.e. the popularity of gift registries, the perception that one isnt thoughtful if you dont yet a good gift etc.
Best gift ever and good for the environment.
I do prefer receiving gifts when those gifts are informed. Which is why asking about desired gifts is perfectly fine.
There are certain classes of things that I do not consider necessary yet I would desire and for which the variety available results in paralysis of choice. For these, having the giver choose, and having the thing have additional sentimental value (it is from the giver) makes it more valuable than the thing itself.
Gifts are an emotional thing so it's no wonder that they don't make much sense from a purely rational perspective, as (at least most of the time) that's not the point of gifting.
A communicative gift is I know they won't like TinTin the way I do but given that they are a lesbian that wants to read lesbian focused literature maybe give them the Locas: Maggie and Hopey stories and they will get that you considered them in choosing what to get, but also to introduce something to them that you like that you value and that you hope they will value as well.
You chose well.
You need to try giving someone honey from a beehive you maintain. People seem to love it and come back for more. I have hundreds of kilos spare.
Still, people appreciate it a lot, much more than if I purchased a better-looking loaf of bread from a professional baker for 2-3€.
I don't think it's necessarily tied to the value it represents to the receiver, it's the act of kindness with the unexpectedness of a gift that gives it value.
I enjoy baking sourdough loaves to return favors though e.g. if s neighbour takes care of my lawn while I'm away. That's fun and keeps the books balanced.
The basic idea is let's measure what the gift cost and what the receiver valued it at. But not everything that matters can be measured and not everything that is measured, matters. The study should have accounted for the strength of relationship between the gifter and gifted and how it was affected by the gift. It should have measured social status of the gifter before and after. These deepened bonds and increased social status could pay off later in the year. The 2001 paper Poverty and public celebrations in rural India (https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/2528.html) examines that idea and finds it to be true.
When you're looking at an institution that has developed independently thousands of times across human history in wildly disparate cultures, you need to ask yourself what benefit it brings before dismissing it.
This comment reminds me of the teenage atheists who think religion is worthless because it's a bunch of made up stuff they don't believe is true. Regardless of what they believe, religion has indepdendatly developed and flourished in a number of cultures. Religion brings benefits to it's members, such as living longer, happier lives.
[citation needed]
Association of Religious Service Attendance With Mortality Among Women (2016) - https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar....
> Women who went to any kind of religious service more than once a week had a 33% lower chance than their secular peers of dying during the 16-year study-follow-up period.
Not does it account for organized religions ability to forcibly displace other social support (community gathering) organizations. (Social support was the largest factor in improved health among religious people in the study).
Study also excluded, by design, any effects religious services may have on causing cardiovascular problems or cancer, on confounders due to already sick people finding religion.
I would hazard a guess the removed bit is actually very important, because having a social network has been shown to improve lives: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=social+network+and+old+age&ia=web (hopefully that's enough citation), and regularly showing up to congregation is probably a huge step in having a social network.
And of course it's not much use to someone who doesn't like wine (they may have had a non-alcoholic alternative).
It's like giving out RTX 3080s en masse. Most people won't get the value of what you spent.
(reached the first page too!)
exception: sexual favours ?
On other side picking what to give is endless source of anxiety to me.
It’s only a “net negative” if the receiver of the gift can’t afford their necessities.
The same is true when there is information asymmetry. I wouldn’t spend $10 on this specific candy from Japan, because I didn’t know it existed. It’s “non optimal” and again that’s the gift. I get to try a new candy I’ve never heard of.
A gift represents a decision made on behalf of the receiver by the giver. In very few situations would the receiver make the same decision as the giver with the same resources. It's assumed that the receiver will use the same resources in an optimal manner, so gift-giving is a net negative.
In some circumstances, gifts are valued higher by the receiver than the giver. Gifts of time, of expertise, of opportunity, or things that the giver can get at a much lower cost than the receiver - these can be more appreciated.
Anyway, that's my grand theory of gifting, and why I generally avoid it, unless I can make it worthwhile to the gift receiver.