Maybe the actresses in question didn’t want to have a little boy, who’s not their son and is old enough to make jokes about boobs and is just a couple of years off puberty, sucking on their breast. I know actresses have to do all sorts of things they might never want to do in real life, but that’s probably a bit too far for most.
That too.
I alluded to this in my initial question - that the actress requested it - This seems the most likely candidate - still seems that if there was such an aversion- they might find other ways to film the scene so that no kid/boobie interaction ever takes place. (IOW, its not neccesary to show mouth on nipple to give the idea that the kid is having lunch).
If they could find a handful of actresses willing to fuck a dwarf, I’m sure they could find a half decent ones for this scene. I’ll agree that it was a prosthetic though, if nothing else because it’s probably more comfortable for the actress, and they can easily get away with it.
Not that I’m in any way opposed to dwarf lovin’, just sayin’…
Well, most sex scenes do involve some sort of subtle covering. Every scene was built so that there was no genitalia touching, so flesh-coloured thongs and stuff is used. I haven’t read anything specifically about Game of Thrones, but True Blood has scenes just as explicit and the actors have talked about banana hammocks and such.
C’mon people, there’s no way they (HBO’s lawyers, the Actors’ Union, the kid’s appointed chaperone, anyone with any sense, etc.) is going to allow filming a minor child sucking an adult woman’s tit…there are strict laws preventing the kid from working too late at night and making sure he does his schoolwork on set, for chrissakes, never mind engaging in what some could potentialy perceive as kiddie porn.
Have you seen Peter Dinklage’swife?
I assumed it was a special effect breast, maybe intentionally not as realistic as they could have done. Probably to avoid this question being asked too hard.
–
It’s the beard. Chicks dig the beard. And also the charming and talented and successful.
And the gorgeous eyes and the cocky grin and the hair I could run my fingers through for days and…
I’m sorry. What was this thread about again? 
Hey, I wouldn’t mind giving the man a run myself, and I’m not even into dwarves. Or men, for that matter.
Faking sex with an adult human who happens to be a dwarf is waaaay less weird than allowing an older kid to suck your tit for real. It’d most likely be pretty disgusting to the kid.
Huh. She looks quite a bit like the actress playing Shae, his mistress/retained whore, on the HBO series.
Naw. I just couldn’t see it because it was in shadow on my monitor, which I keep kinda dark. It still looks fake, though.
I didn’t think to turn it up because I remembered how much YouTube tends to freak out about that, and just assumed it would have gotten taken down otherwise. Then again, you can put actual mammogram stuff on there, so who knows.
A tack-on question about “if this were real life”: Could a woman keep producing milk for 6 years?
It didn’t look fake to me. The nipple shifted back as the kid released it, so if it is a silicone breast, it is a very good one. The actress has lines on her face, but she may still have very nice breasts - in my experience, they show the ravages of age more slowly than the face.
As for pretending “to fuck a dwarf”, Dinklage is not at all without a female following. He’s facially very handsome and has a great voice- it’s not like Mini-Me is humping your leg. (Hell, my father’s cousin Pete found a regular sized woman to fuck him for real [two kids] and he was way beyond just dwarf.)
Many female Dopers are big fans of Peter Dinklage.
Yes, theoretically. If the nipples are consistently stimulated, there’s really no theoretical end point to the release of prolactin, the hormone that governs milk production. Many wet-nurses went from one child to another, for years and years if their milk was “healthful”. (The really f’ing cool thing is that we now know their milk adjusts itself - turns nutritionally ideal for younger infants after they stop feeding the older infant! How the heck?! I don’t know. No one seems to.)
There was a famous wet-nurse, Judith Waterford, once found by physicians to be lactating at age 81. Now, she’s famous *because *she was still lactating at age 81, so that’s not at all common, but it shows it’s physiologically possible!
What I want to know is…would extended breastfeeding stave off menopause? Or would menopause generally dry up the milk and Ms. Waterford is an exceptional hormonal case? I have no idea, and I don’t think anyone’s studied it. But that’s waaaaaaay off topic, so I’ll stop now and get back to sighing over Peter Dinklage…
[/hijack]
I thought menopause was triggered by the release of the last viable egg from a woman’s ovaries. And that “breastfeeding may delay the return to fertility for some women by suppressing ovulation. A breastfeeding woman may not ovulate, or have regular periods, during the entire lactation period.” (from the Wikipedia article). So, would decades of milk production result in an extraordinarily low number of menses, and thus a delayed menopause?
A woman will only not ovulate while breastfeeding if she’s thin and breastfeeding exclusively - no other food or drink to the kiddo - round the clock on demand. Most women in the US, not being thin and not exclusively breastfeeding past 4 or 6 months, should NOT rely on breastfeeding for contraception. A wet-nurse may or may not ovulate, depending if she’s 'round the clock “help” for an exclusively breastfed infant, or if she’s an adjunct to mother’s feedings or only nursing during the day.
But suppressing ovulation does not seem to inherently delay menopause, or women on the Pill (who are similarly not ovulating all those months) would have later menopause than women never on the Pill, and there’s no such difference. Women have thousands of potentially viable eggs left when they enter menopause, although they won’t ever become viable under natural circumstances.
OK, thanks.