Where things break down if one party expects to receive a "no strings attached gift" and one is expecting to participate in a complex system of social and economic credit balance.
I'm not sure how to make the above sound less snarky - I'm genuinely interested in how this stuff compares to more formalized systems of debt in modern societies.
If it's an obligation, then I suppose the retributive action (if any) from not meeting this obligation probably depends on the society and the event. Different societies have different responses to individual who don't play by the rules.
In general even non-literate human societies are pretty good in carrying a common ledger of who-owes-what-to-whom.
I suggest the book "Debt the first 5000 years" by David Graeber on the details.
But overall, when traveling, check the local customs around gifts from a cultural guide :)
Small groups of people (tribes, essentially) can and do use peer pressure (ostracisation) to enforce the agreed upon social contracts.
IOW, if you get a reputation as a non-giver amongst your group of friends and family who are all givers, they'll soon stop associating with you.
You become a bad neighbor and everybody stops helping you. Things may get as bad as nobody trusting you at all, and you becoming the escape goat for some problem.
People organize this way up to today, even in mature economies. There's mystery to solve.
That said, I think a lot of economy is rooted in emotional bonding. I'm helping a lot of neighbors (people that saw me growing up). Offer my time for free since most of their issues are trivial computer stuff. They want to pay me even when it's a 3 minute check and there was nothing to do. Many times they say they don't want to feel indebted. Even though I clearly state that I'm really happy to spend time doing this for free, and will really have no future request to them because I moved a usb cable or something like that. Money is a kind of shared agreement on help here. If you don't use an intermediate medium, you get deeper but also messier relationship because no one is sure how the other party feels and if they'll think they will want more retribution later. With good and intimate relationships it's rarely an issue because you know they'll provide, there's no risk no fear.. but with many people you run into it's creating a lot of unknowns.
[1] eg Large-scale application of fusion power. According to mass–energy equivalence, Type I implies the conversion of about 2 kg of matter to energy per second https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale#Type_I_civiliz...
I’m glad there is a Wikipedia page that discusses the reciprocity of non-cash relationships. It’s an enormously important element of social societies (of humans and other species) and is probably 60% of the content of advice columnists (my child isn’t calling me / I have a clingy friend / I didn’t get invited to a party though the hosts were at my house for dinner …)
"What follows is from a description of a dzamalag held in the 1940s, as observed by an anthropologist named Ronald Berndt.
Once again, it begins as strangers, after some initial negotiations, are invited into the hosts’ main camp. The visitors in this particular example were famous for their “much-prized serrated spears”—their hosts had access to good European cloth. The trading begins when the visiting party, which consisted of both men and women, enters the camp’s dancing ground of “ring place,” and three of them began to entertain their hosts with music. Two men start singing, a third accompanies them on the didjeridu. Before long, women from the hosts’ side come and attack the musicians:
Men and women rise and begin to dance. The dzamalag opens when two Gunwinggu women of the opposite moiety to the singing men “give dzamalag” to the latter. They present each man with a piece of cloth, and hit or touch him, pulling him down on the ground, calling him a dzamalag husband, and joking with him in an erotic vein. Then another woman of the opposite moiety to the pipe player gives him cloth, hits and jokes with him.
This sets in motion the dzamalag exchange. Men from the visiting group sit quietly while women of the opposite moiety come over and give them cloth, hit them, and invite them to copulate; they take any liberty they choose with the men, amid amusement and applause, while the singing and dancing continue. Women try to undo the men’s loin coverings or touch their penises, and to drag them from the “ring place” for coitus. The men go with their dzamalag partners, with a show of reluctance, to copulate in the bushes away from the fires which light up the dancers. They may give the women tobacco or beads. When the women return, they give part of this tobacco to their own husbands, who have encouraged them to go dzamalag. The husbands, in turn, use the tobacco to pay their own female dzamalag partners…
New singers and musicians appear, are again assaulted and dragged off to the bushes; men encourage their wives “not to be shy,” so as to maintain the Gunwinggu reputation for hospitality; eventually those men also take the initiative with the visitors’ wives, offering cloth, hitting them, and leading them off into the bushes. Beads and tobacco circulate. Finally, once participants have all paired off at least once, and the guests are satisfied with the cloth they have acquired, the women stop dancing and stand in two rows and the visitors line up to repay them.
Then visiting men of one moiety dance towards the women of the opposite moiety, in order to “give them dzamalag.” They hold shovel-nosed spears poised, pretending to spear the women, but instead hit them with the flat of the blade. “We will not spear you, for we have already speared you with our penises.” They present the spears to the women. Then visiting men of the other moiety go through the same actions with the women of their opposite moiety, giving them spears with serrated points. This terminates the ceremony, which is followed by a large distribution of food."