In motion, there's subtle clues that tell you it's not quite human, BUT, if you were to manipulate it into an expression and take a screenshot... I don't think I'd be able to tell it wasn't real. It's the muscle range, the way the wrinkles appear, the way the blood coloration changes in response to the tightness of the skin, the pores, the subsurface scattering, the facial hairs, etc... incredibly convincing on a whole new level, even extremely close up, which is where the illusion normally breaks down. Very very impressive.

There are subtle clues throughout the books, some of which I don't want to comment on since I don't want to give away spoilers for future seasons.

Besides, gay men never get married, especially ones trying to be kings.

http://www.azhighground.com/?p=353

There's the blog post.

Also Rachel Maddow says she is "Totally insulated from the advertising decisions" or whatever. It's bullshit. She wouldn't have her show if she didn't understand how it worked on some level. She knows what she's not supposed to do, and if she didn't there'd be subtle clues given to her.

*nsfw (for those that might get in trouble for a boobie shot at work)

as an advocate for BF'ing, this goes WAY beyond what is considered normal and healthy for a child. listening to your child's, sometimes subtle, clues will alert you when they are reading to wean themselves .... animals do it, as do we. i BF my children and they certainly reaped the benefits health and intelligence-wise, but this young child is no longer getting those same rewards.

allowing her child access to her breast for comfort is damaging as her child is not learning to comfort herself. i feel it's actually selfish on the mother's part ... keeping her child from self-actualization and awareness.