Kiz o r 10:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC) Reply It predates the offensive use of the term and as far as I know, which isn't very far, most people either aren't bothered because no offensive intent was meant or haven't thought about it at all - it's just a name. There's been a fracas here several timezones away about a traditional confectionary with a name that generously translates as Negro's Kiss. Thus, to the early settlers, an "Indian Giver" was not one who took a gift back that they had previously given, but rather, was one who gave a gift with the expectation that they would not only receive a gift in return, but that the gift they received would be of greater value than the one they gave. Instead the term was tossed about as freely as one might toss about "Dutch Treat" these days, though that term, too, has its roots in a early British slur against the then-perceived stinginess of the Dutch.Īs for "Indian Giver", which is mentioned by someone else in this discussion, it's my understanding that it stems from a lack of understanding by early American settlers of the practice among some "Indian" tribes of always returning any gift received with an even greater gift, or else risk insulting the original gift giver. While this term immediately struck me as racially insensitive, those I have questioned about it hadn't even stopped to consider that it might be rooted in racism. previously opened gift from another participant), with the exception that they cannot take back the very same gift that was just taken from them. If the person makes the later choice, then the person who had their gift taken away from them becomes next in line to make the same choice (unopened gift from pile vs.
Not sure how old this expression is, but I have heard people use this to refer to the chaotic gift exchange game wherein each person at a party, upon being called up to select a "secret Santa" gift, is given a choice between either selecting an unopened gift from a pile of gifts, or of taking a gift that has already been opened away from another participant.
0 kommentar(er)
