Author Topic: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)  (Read 8291 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gellchom

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2137
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #45 on: March 19, 2014, 02:06:14 PM »
I think it is rude to be outwardly ungrateful for a gift - one should always be cheerful and thankful. But I also think it is self-centered (I am struggling with the term I mean) to think poorly of someone because they were not blown away by your "thoughtful" gift that is something they don't want or need. Like the towels in Lynn2000 example. It would be silly to be offended that someone else's taste is not the same as yours, and that the brown brand Y towels were returned and not used.
I didn't see anything in Lynn2000's post that even suggested that the giver of the towels was "offended that someone else's taste is not the same as [theirs], and that the brown brand Y towels were returned and not used."

I understand that Amy is very particular, and at least in some cases for very good reason.  But did she consider the possibility that the givers of the towels and baby supplies did not even see her registry and just picked out what they thought was a nice gift?  And that they couldn't care less if she exchanges things -- indeed, I would imagine someone buying towels is thinking, "I don't know what color their bathroom is, but these really nice towels come in lots of colors, so I'll get them and they can exchange the for the color they want, or anything else they'd prefer.  It'll be more trouble to wrap than a gift certificate, but it's nicer to receive."  (What is the big deal about having to exchange things?  I never heard anyone complain about having to make a trip to the store when they received a gift certificate.  Well, if you think about it, a gift you are exchanging functions pretty much like a gift certificate.)

If you can't use some products because of allergies or something, and they can't be returned, then regift or donate them.  I cannot imagine that the majority of items were in that category.  If it's just not your preferred brand?  Sorry, that is what I call an ungrateful SS -- the same as if I choose a sweater or novel for you that isn't by your favorite designer or author.  We aren't entitled to receive only gifts that 100% hit the mark.  Any time we think something like, "Why didn't they just get me what I wanted?  Is that really so hard?" the focus is way off the real meaning of a gift and onto our own sense of entitlement.

This kind of discussion seems to rest on the premise that if a registry exists, guests may not be required to purchase only gifts listed (although they really should, if they want to be considerate), but that they are required to consult it, and therefore if they buy anything else are substituting their own preferences for the recipients'.  And that really bothers me.  Gifts are an expression of the givers' good wishes and generosity, not the performance of a duty to fill in someone's shopping list.

Kaymar

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 321
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #46 on: March 19, 2014, 02:10:09 PM »
I think it is rude to be outwardly ungrateful for a gift - one should always be cheerful and thankful. But I also think it is self-centered (I am struggling with the term I mean) to think poorly of someone because they were not blown away by your "thoughtful" gift that is something they don't want or need. Like the towels in Lynn2000 example. It would be silly to be offended that someone else's taste is not the same as yours, and that the brown brand Y towels were returned and not used.
I didn't see anything in Lynn2000's post that even suggested that the giver of the towels was "offended that someone else's taste is not the same as [theirs], and that the brown brand Y towels were returned and not used."

I understand that Amy is very particular, and at least in some cases for very good reason.  But did she consider the possibility that the givers of the towels and baby supplies did not even see her registry and just picked out what they thought was a nice gift?  And that they couldn't care less if she exchanges things -- indeed, I would imagine someone buying towels is thinking, "I don't know what color their bathroom is, but these really nice towels come in lots of colors, so I'll get them and they can exchange the for the color they want, or anything else they'd prefer.  It'll be more trouble to wrap than a gift certificate, but it's nicer to receive."  (What is the big deal about having to exchange things?  I never heard anyone complain about having to make a trip to the store when they received a gift certificate.  Well, if you think about it, a gift you are exchanging functions pretty much like a gift certificate.)

If you can't use some products because of allergies or something, and they can't be returned, then regift or donate them.  I cannot imagine that the majority of items were in that category.  If it's just not your preferred brand?  Sorry, that is what I call an ungrateful SS -- the same as if I choose a sweater or novel for you that isn't by your favorite designer or author.  We aren't entitled to receive only gifts that 100% hit the mark.  Any time we think something like, "Why didn't they just get me what I wanted?  Is that really so hard?" the focus is way off the real meaning of a gift and onto our own sense of entitlement.

This kind of discussion seems to rest on the premise that if a registry exists, guests may not be required to purchase only gifts listed (although they really should, if they want to be considerate), but that they are required to consult it, and therefore if they buy anything else are substituting their own preferences for the recipients'.  And that really bothers me.  Gifts are an expression of the givers' good wishes and generosity, not the performance of a duty to fill in someone's shopping list.

Gellchom, I agree re the basket of products - I know people who pride themselves on their ability to put together a basket like that (usually in a baby bath tub) of essential products that they found useful for their own kids.  Those folks do not look at registries when invited to baby showers, because they've got the perfect gift - and I've never been at a shower where a mom to be was anything but over the moon with the practical thoughtfulness involved.  So I'd never assume that such a gift was produced in contravention of information regarding the mom's preferences on the registry.

TurtleDove

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5718
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #47 on: March 19, 2014, 02:10:56 PM »
I think it is rude to be outwardly ungrateful for a gift - one should always be cheerful and thankful. But I also think it is self-centered (I am struggling with the term I mean) to think poorly of someone because they were not blown away by your "thoughtful" gift that is something they don't want or need. Like the towels in Lynn2000 example. It would be silly to be offended that someone else's taste is not the same as yours, and that the brown brand Y towels were returned and not used.
I didn't see anything in Lynn2000's post that even suggested that the giver of the towels was "offended that someone else's taste is not the same as [theirs], and that the brown brand Y towels were returned and not used."
I understand that Amy is very particular, and at least in some cases for very good reason.  But did she consider the possibility that the givers of the towels and baby supplies did not even see her registry and just picked out what they thought was a nice gift?  And that they couldn't care less if she exchanges things -- indeed, I would imagine someone buying towels is thinking, "I don't know what color their bathroom is, but these really nice towels come in lots of colors, so I'll get them and they can exchange the for the color they want, or anything else they'd prefer.  It'll be more trouble to wrap than a gift certificate, but it's nicer to receive."  (What is the big deal about having to exchange things?  I never heard anyone complain about having to make a trip to the store when they received a gift certificate.  Well, if you think about it, a gift you are exchanging functions pretty much like a gift certificate.)

If you can't use some products because of allergies or something, and they can't be returned, then regift or donate them.  I cannot imagine that the majority of items were in that category.  If it's just not your preferred brand?  Sorry, that is what I call an ungrateful SS -- the same as if I choose a sweater or novel for you that isn't by your favorite designer or author.  We aren't entitled to receive only gifts that 100% hit the mark.  Any time we think something like, "Why didn't they just get me what I wanted?  Is that really so hard?" the focus is way off the real meaning of a gift and onto our own sense of entitlement.

This kind of discussion seems to rest on the premise that if a registry exists, guests may not be required to purchase only gifts listed (although they really should, if they want to be considerate), but that they are required to consult it, and therefore if they buy anything else are substituting their own preferences for the recipients'.  And that really bothers me.  Gifts are an expression of the givers' good wishes and generosity, not the performance of a duty to fill in someone's shopping list.

I disagree with you about the purpose of gift giving, but reasonable minds can disagree.  :)  Regarding the bolded, neither did I.  But the rest of your post indicates that you are offended when someone's taste differs from yours - you find them to be SS and ungrateful.  For me, it would be the offended giver who is SS, because the focus of gift giving, for me, is on the recipient and not on the giver.

TurtleDove

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5718
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #48 on: March 19, 2014, 02:15:09 PM »

Gellchom, I agree re the basket of products - I know people who pride themselves on their ability to put together a basket like that (usually in a baby bath tub) of essential products that they found useful for their own kids.  Those folks do not look at registries when invited to baby showers, because they've got the perfect gift - and I've never been at a shower where a mom to be was anything but over the moon with the practical thoughtfulness involved.  So I'd never assume that such a gift was produced in contravention of information regarding the mom's preferences on the registry.

True story: I received a basket like this at a baby shower.  When I moved about 4 years later, I threw away the majority of the items unused. My point is, I am positive the giver thought she was giving a thoughful gift.  While I thanked her in person and sent a thank you note, the gift did not get used by me.  Neither of us were rude. I never told her I didn't use her gift.  But, I didn't.  I used the things I wanted to use, which, coincidentally, were the things I registered for.

gellchom

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2137
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #49 on: March 19, 2014, 02:21:45 PM »
I disagree with you about the purpose of gift giving, but reasonable minds can disagree.  :)  Regarding the bolded, neither did I.  But the rest of your post indicates that you are offended when someone's taste differs from yours - you find them to be SS and ungrateful.  For me, it would be the offended giver who is SS, because the focus of gift giving, for me, is on the recipient and not on the giver.

I never said that I am "offended when someone's taste differs from" mine, and I am not.  I couldn't care less if they exchange what I chose for something that they'd prefer, or if they regift it.  I don't call that "SS and ungrateful" at all.

What I call SS and ungrateful is someone's feeling so entitled to their own pre-selected items that they question the motives and generosity of anyone who gives them anything else.

If you disagree with my point that the purpose of gift-giving is not merely the performance of a duty to fill in someone's shopping list, then why not just declare that all gifts must always be cash?  That is the only way to be sure they will get exactly what they want without even bothering with a registry.

TurtleDove

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5718
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #50 on: March 19, 2014, 02:37:38 PM »
What I call SS and ungrateful is someone's feeling so entitled to their own pre-selected items that they question the motives and generosity of anyone who gives them anything else.

I don't think most people feel "entitled to their own pre-selected items."  I certainly never have.  But I think some people, like me, are just more practical and find it a waste of time, energy and money for a giver to be more concerned with what they want to give than what the recipient wants to recieve.  No one is rude for giving a gift, whatever that gift is. However, I do think that if a person publicly labels someone as SS and rude and entitled for not appreciating a gift in the way the gift giver wants them to that would be rude. I also find labeling people who have registries as entitled is rude.

Kaymar

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 321
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #51 on: March 19, 2014, 02:39:17 PM »

Gellchom, I agree re the basket of products - I know people who pride themselves on their ability to put together a basket like that (usually in a baby bath tub) of essential products that they found useful for their own kids.  Those folks do not look at registries when invited to baby showers, because they've got the perfect gift - and I've never been at a shower where a mom to be was anything but over the moon with the practical thoughtfulness involved.  So I'd never assume that such a gift was produced in contravention of information regarding the mom's preferences on the registry.

True story: I received a basket like this at a baby shower.  When I moved about 4 years later, I threw away the majority of the items unused. My point is, I am positive the giver thought she was giving a thoughful gift.  While I thanked her in person and sent a thank you note, the gift did not get used by me.  Neither of us were rude. I never told her I didn't use her gift.  But, I didn't.  I used the things I wanted to use, which, coincidentally, were the things I registered for.

Haha, interesting!  I am neither a mom nor a giver of such baskets - I'm the practical auntie who buys all of the non-fun but necessary safety / babyproofing equipment and thermometers and other non-cutesy stuff off of the registry.  I was always jealous of people who made up those fun baskets but now I know they are not as universally loved as I imagined!

Lynn2000

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4970
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #52 on: March 19, 2014, 02:42:46 PM »
Sorry, didn't mean to make the thread all about Amy! :) I just think she's a good example here, considering what the OP has been saying about her DF and the honeymoon registry. I find Amy very thought-provoking about gifts--sometimes I think, "Wow, that seems very SS, she should be glad for whatever people give her," and then other times I think, "You know, she kind of has a point, that was a pretty odd gift choice."

I think it can be very, very easy to get caught up in wanting exactly what you want and nothing else, and finding ways to rationalize that. But I also think it's not healthy to focus so much on the endpoint, and one can easily become rude in trying to control the journey to it (e.g., what other people spend their money on).
~Lynn2000

gellchom

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2137
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #53 on: March 19, 2014, 11:30:03 PM »
What I call SS and ungrateful is someone's feeling so entitled to their own pre-selected items that they question the motives and generosity of anyone who gives them anything else.

I don't think most people feel "entitled to their own pre-selected items."  I certainly never have.  But I think some people, like me, are just more practical and find it a waste of time, energy and money for a giver to be more concerned with what they want to give than what the recipient wants to recieve.  No one is rude for giving a gift, whatever that gift is. However, I do think that if a person publicly labels someone as SS and rude and entitled for not appreciating a gift in the way the gift giver wants them to that would be rude. I also find labeling people who have registries as entitled is rude.
Now, be fair.  I never said any of that, and I most certainly did not say that people who have registries are "entitled."  What I did say I find SS, ungrateful, and entitled -- you quoted it, in fact -- is to question the motives and generosity of anyone who gives them anything else.

purple

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 411
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #54 on: March 20, 2014, 12:02:42 AM »
I think there is sometimes a conflict over gift expectations, as camlan says, and it can be hard to see when you (general) have tipped over the line--you're so excited about getting specific things, or being able to take a trip you couldn't afford on your own, or something like that, and then someone goes and gives you something that does not fit with this plan. We're only human, it can be hard to take a step back and realize, "No, I should be grateful for this gift, no matter what it is." (I do think there are mean-spirited, dismissive gifts that one does not need to be grateful for, but I don't think that's the case here.)

For example, my friend Amy put things on her wedding registry and baby shower registry, and she wanted those things, not something similar, not a cheaper version, not a different color. She's pragmatic and decisive, she researched everything before deciding on it, and she truly didn't understand why someone would get her something different. She wanted sage green towels in brand X, someone gave her chocolate brown towels in brand Y. Why? Obviously they didn't realize that the color, brand, and store were selected very carefully, and that she will immediately take the brown towels back to the store without even unfolding them. I think I accompanied her on at least 3 trips to return things to stores, before the wedding even took place. And returning something to a store is not always the fastest or most pleasant experience, and you start thinking more about the time and inconvenience and gas, and "Why couldn't they have just given me something from my list?! Was that really so hard?!"

But of course, once you get too far down that path, I think you're in danger of becoming rude. I suppose if you always keep it to yourself, or at least don't let the giver know, you're functionally still good. But if it bleeds out into how you think about the person--"I really wanted X, why couldn't they just do that?"--that can be bad.

The bolded is something I cannot stand.
You throw the party / wedding that _you_ (general) can afford and you (general) take the honeymoon that _you_ (general) can afford.

I don't want to see a cash bar and a honeymoon registry because you (general) have decided that you (general) want to have a party or go on a holiday that you need me to subsidise.

I'm quite generous when it comes to wedding gifts.  I don't mind parting with a bit of cash for a HC, but once they start telling me to give them this or that, it's the quickest way to make me tighten my purse strings.

TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 30473
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #55 on: March 20, 2014, 12:09:19 AM »
Quote
if their goal was to get Amy something she would like and use. If she hadn't specified any brands/products, that would be one thing, but she had already expressed her preferences, so to go with something directly opposed to them seems a little odd to me. Also you kind of have to know Amy, and how she does things, and you would think anyone who came to her baby shower would, but obviously that's not always true.

Of course, Amy has no idea whether that gift giver even looked at the list.

perpetua

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1903
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #56 on: March 20, 2014, 04:23:51 AM »

For example, my friend Amy put things on her wedding registry and baby shower registry, and she wanted those things, not something similar, not a cheaper version, not a different color. She's pragmatic and decisive, she researched everything before deciding on it, and she truly didn't understand why someone would get her something different. She wanted sage green towels in brand X, someone gave her chocolate brown towels in brand Y. Why? Obviously they didn't realize that the color, brand, and store were selected very carefully, and that she will immediately take the brown towels back to the store without even unfolding them. I think I accompanied her on at least 3 trips to return things to stores, before the wedding even took place. And returning something to a store is not always the fastest or most pleasant experience, and you start thinking more about the time and inconvenience and gas, and "Why couldn't they have just given me something from my list?! Was that really so hard?!"


That's not a registry... that's a shopping list  ;D

But then I really dislike the idea of registries (or 'wedding lists' as we call them) anyway so I may not be the most unbiased. I can just about get behind them as a suggestion, ie, 'we could use some new glasses' or whatever, but I think when it gets into this level of detail, it rolls over into expecting people to fund your household choices, and 99% of the time it's not like these things are needed for setting up home, like the 'olden days'. They're *wants*, not needs, so I find specifying to that level a bit cheeky.


gollymolly2

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2629
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #57 on: March 20, 2014, 04:30:50 AM »
I think there is sometimes a conflict over gift expectations, as camlan says, and it can be hard to see when you (general) have tipped over the line--you're so excited about getting specific things, or being able to take a trip you couldn't afford on your own, or something like that, and then someone goes and gives you something that does not fit with this plan. We're only human, it can be hard to take a step back and realize, "No, I should be grateful for this gift, no matter what it is." (I do think there are mean-spirited, dismissive gifts that one does not need to be grateful for, but I don't think that's the case here.)

For example, my friend Amy put things on her wedding registry and baby shower registry, and she wanted those things, not something similar, not a cheaper version, not a different color. She's pragmatic and decisive, she researched everything before deciding on it, and she truly didn't understand why someone would get her something different. She wanted sage green towels in brand X, someone gave her chocolate brown towels in brand Y. Why? Obviously they didn't realize that the color, brand, and store were selected very carefully, and that she will immediately take the brown towels back to the store without even unfolding them. I think I accompanied her on at least 3 trips to return things to stores, before the wedding even took place. And returning something to a store is not always the fastest or most pleasant experience, and you start thinking more about the time and inconvenience and gas, and "Why couldn't they have just given me something from my list?! Was that really so hard?!"

But of course, once you get too far down that path, I think you're in danger of becoming rude. I suppose if you always keep it to yourself, or at least don't let the giver know, you're functionally still good. But if it bleeds out into how you think about the person--"I really wanted X, why couldn't they just do that?"--that can be bad.

The bolded is something I cannot stand.
You throw the party / wedding that _you_ (general) can afford and you (general) take the honeymoon that _you_ (general) can afford.

I don't want to see a cash bar and a honeymoon registry because you (general) have decided that you (general) want to have a party or go on a holiday that you need me to subsidise.

I'm quite generous when it comes to wedding gifts.  I don't mind parting with a bit of cash for a HC, but once they start telling me to give them this or that, it's the quickest way to make me tighten my purse strings.

I've never understood this line of reasoning. If a couple registers for china and linens and  a bunch of appliances they couldn't otherwise afford on their own, that's okay? But if they prefer the experience of traveling together to a toaster, thats not ok?

menley

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 544
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #58 on: March 20, 2014, 05:48:54 AM »
That's not a registry... that's a shopping list  ;D

But then I really dislike the idea of registries (or 'wedding lists' as we call them) anyway so I may not be the most unbiased. I can just about get behind them as a suggestion, ie, 'we could use some new glasses' or whatever, but I think when it gets into this level of detail, it rolls over into expecting people to fund your household choices, and 99% of the time it's not like these things are needed for setting up home, like the 'olden days'. They're *wants*, not needs, so I find specifying to that level a bit cheeky.

But any wedding gift is a "want" and not a need, isn't it?

I guess I just don't really understand anti-registry people. I get that sometimes people go overboard with them. But if someone has a registry, I always buy them either 1) an item I like off of the registry or 2) a gift card to the place where they have registered. My thinking is this: I want to get the recipient something they want. They've given me a list of what they want - so for me to buy something that's not on the registry is to imply that I know what they want better than they do. And to me, that seems pretty entitled. We've seen lots of threads on here about frustration with friends and relatives who think they know better than the poster does, and everyone seems to agree that is annoying/frustrating/rude. So how is it different when it comes to the registry?




perpetua

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1903
Re: We're so going to E-Hell... (3 new questions on post 15)
« Reply #59 on: March 20, 2014, 07:02:06 AM »
That's not a registry... that's a shopping list  ;D

But then I really dislike the idea of registries (or 'wedding lists' as we call them) anyway so I may not be the most unbiased. I can just about get behind them as a suggestion, ie, 'we could use some new glasses' or whatever, but I think when it gets into this level of detail, it rolls over into expecting people to fund your household choices, and 99% of the time it's not like these things are needed for setting up home, like the 'olden days'. They're *wants*, not needs, so I find specifying to that level a bit cheeky.

But any wedding gift is a "want" and not a need, isn't it?

I guess I just don't really understand anti-registry people. I get that sometimes people go overboard with them. But if someone has a registry, I always buy them either 1) an item I like off of the registry or 2) a gift card to the place where they have registered. My thinking is this: I want to get the recipient something they want. They've given me a list of what they want - so for me to buy something that's not on the registry is to imply that I know what they want better than they do. And to me, that seems pretty entitled. We've seen lots of threads on here about frustration with friends and relatives who think they know better than the poster does, and everyone seems to agree that is annoying/frustrating/rude. So how is it different when it comes to the registry?

Because I think telling people what to buy you is rude and presumptuous. I think broad suggestions are fine *if* someone specifically says "What would you like?" but when it comes down to 'Our wedding list is here and we want this blue and red checked towel from Marks & Spencer and it costs 30 and this mug and this saucer and and and' - I don't know.  For one thing, yes, it is a want and not a need, so it comes over as greedy. For another, if I'm (general) going to get you a present, then don't be cheeky about it. If a gift isn't to your liking then fine, do what you want to dispose of it, but don't dictate what people can buy you in the first place. Whatever happened to not expecting a gift and being gracious about what you *do* get?

It just seems presumptuous and I really dislike it, although it's probably a personal quirk.

Probably a subject for a spin off though, so as not to derail.