Talk:Blood brother

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to blood.

Sociology Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

China Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Are the Native Americans really descended from the Mongols?

-- Haha.. I had the same question when I read this page. Truthfully, they may be long lost cousins... but the hypothesis was only ventured within the last century, so there is probably still a lot of work to be done to verify it. Someone correct me if I'm wrong please. :)

I removed it, they are separated by hundreds of generations. The custom has nothing to do with their descent, it's a common custom. Neutrality^talk 05:14, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't put the stub tag on talk pages... --Jemiller226 05:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gender biased

I have allways percived it a gender neutral concept, besides switching genders depending on who comittes the ritual. Then of course you call it blood sisters. This terme for the same concept amongst females is widely accepted if you do a search.

(It was common when I grow up in the 80's among girls in Sweden, same as for the boys doing it, we were influenced mainly by american cinema and books. And I expect it is even more well known now. As an of course often gender specific but still, general concept.)

I understand there's a lingvistic problem. In my language we have a gender neutral word as well, for the relation sisters and brothers. Wich would be the pov way to describe it. I don't know that word in english if there is one?

That's also what we would call it when a female and a male exchange blood in this way or think of them selves as blood ..kin?

So if anyone has an idea how to improve this article, the name of the concept and more gender neutral text, who has more accurate knowledge in english please. It's much needed! (polite understatement)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.219.2.127 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 6 June 2007.

The term is "sibling", but it has a clinical and dispassionate connotation that ill-suits the topic. --April Arcus 07:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

maybe change the title to "sworn sibling", are there any terms in English describe sworn kinship as "being parents and children" (not "godparents" because this relationship is irrelevent to Christianity)?--219.79.143.5 03:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wholly disagree with the IP's ridicules arguments.

- Aemaeth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.48.185.54 (talk) 01:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History is biased in this regard. There is a vast wealth of data on every populated continent continent throughout history to back up the notion of blood-brotherhood being far more prevalent than blood-sisterhood, which is historically rare by comparison. Blood-brotherhood is blood-brotherhood, and while this article has few sources, there are plenty of sources to be found if one looks. If blood-sisterhood has a substantial history that can be referenced and cited, then perhaps an article could be created for blood-sisterhood, as the traditions are likely somewhat different. To alter these two things to make them the same is historical revisionism and has no place in this sort of article.

--67.160.190.167 (talk) 01:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree ref a gender unspecific term needed for male-female/female-female. How about blood partners? 92.15.153.184 (talk) 07:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Laughable sentence

In addition to the danger of blood loss or infection, blood brotherhood-type ceremonies pose a high risk of hepatitis and HIV infection.

There are many things wrong with this, not including the fact that it is not even cited (such scientific claims need scientific backing). First, HIV did not enter Europe,North America or the Middle East until at the earliest the 70's / 80's, a period in history long after most blood-cut methods of being a blood brother were conducted. Secondly, a small cut in the finger or forearm will not pose much of a high risk and even if it did, it would be a low risk infection if it was the finger. If it was the forearm, I don't know, but without citations, no one can say if it is or isn't high risk.Tourskin 04:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say we remove that line. It is largely irrelevant. Without a source of infected brothers, then, no need to mention what is blown out of porpotionly obvious. - Aemaeth

Hey, this is talking about present day blood brother ceremonies- which do pose a high risk of infection. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.78.64.102 (talk) 12:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional vs. historical?

Just wondering, why is there a list of fictional blood brothers but not historical ones? And further, why are Yesukhei and Toghril listed as fictional? As far as I know, they're real people... Khanele (talk) 22:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blood Brotherhood in Germany

The idea that Germans associate blood brotherhood exclusively with Native Americans is laughable - how much more German can you get than Wagner? Which reminds me, someone should make a reference to blood brotherhood in the Ring Cycle, as this is one of the most widely known examples of this phenomenon. But what I really wanted to point out is that the German ritual of I think it's called Trinkbruderschaft exists to this day, in which men celebrate an oath of brotherhood by drinking with interlocked arms. A similar ritual is mentioned on this page from Greece, in regard to which its relationship to Blood Brotherhood is appropriately noted. But someone who knows more about this should make a comment on the German version. I for my part will tone down the rather overstated claim about as it exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.180.182 (talk) 05:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

questionable linkage

Is it really necessary to link to "day" there at the bottom? I mean, seriously? It's such a basic concept that I don't think it should be linked to except in articles where's it's actually related, other units of time or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.82.58 (talk) 06:41, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering....

What actually happens to blood that is consumed orally? I assume the Scythians at least believed that it becomes part of one's own blood stream. Does it actually, or do the blood cells just pass through one's digestive system?

Moreover, when blood is actually mingled by whatever means are or have been actually practised, what is the worst that can happen because of the "brothers" being of different blood groups? — Smjg (talk) 14:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Male related by future birth

What does "Male related by future birth" mean? The word "future" was randomly inserted in revision [1] - does it mean anything or can it be removed? 81.86.156.9 (talk) 22:23, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to ask the same thing. It doesn't make sense, and I see now that it was an unsourced claim added by an anon editor, so I've removed it. Iapetus (talk) 15:54, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Örvar-Odd

In Örvar-Odds saga the protagonist becomes sworn brothers with various vikings, but I dont recall if the turf ritual was explicitly described. I have some notes from Hermann Pálsson's translation in a past reading but I did not remark on it, and I am inclined to think it is not in the saga.

One source that does say thie turf ritual happened between Odd and Hjalmar is William Widgery Thomas (1891) p. 388 (and shows the same painting by Winge) but this is hardly a valid scholarly secondary source. The writer was probably just extrapolating, or following some source that was. --Kiyoweap (talk) 01:12, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]