Game of Thrones begins....

[The Larch]

Jeyne Poole hasn't been introduced in the series either, just talked about. You'd have to introduce her as well at the same time, and wonder where she had been hiding since they left Winterfell and arrived at King's Landing. 

When was she talked about?

In the throne room scene between Sansa and her septa. When the septa says that she'll have boys and girls with Joffrey, she asks what'd happen if she only had girls, and puts Jeyne Poole as an example of a family with only girls, Jeyne herself and her four sisters.

[Josquius]

Blackfish could be gay. On the other hand he could be an absolute womaniser who will never tie himself down with one woman. And asexual people aren't too uncommon.

Jeyne Poole- Wasn't that Sansa's friend hanging around with her in the first episodes at Winterfell? (though absent in King's Landing...)

[Viking]

Blackfish could be gay. On the other hand he could be an absolute womaniser who will never tie himself down with one woman. And asexual people aren't too uncommon.

Jeyne Poole- Wasn't that Sansa's friend hanging around with her in the first episodes at Winterfell? (though absent in King's Landing...)

Jeyne Poole was, along with Beth Cassel, was in the background in the first episode.

[grumbler]

I think the fact that people are more likely to accept that someone may be "asexual" rather than "homosexual" is the funny one, considering this is against statistics.

Can you make up some "statistics" to support your assertion?

[Martinus]

I think the fact that people are more likely to accept that someone may be "asexual" rather than "homosexual" is the funny one, considering this is against statistics.

Can you make up some "statistics" to support your assertion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

Asexual people represent app. 1% of the population. That's lower than the estimated percentage of homosexual people (which is estimated at between 5 and 10%, usually).

[The Brain]

Asexual = fugly.

[grumbler]

I think the fact that people are more likely to accept that someone may be "asexual" rather than "homosexual" is the funny one, considering this is against statistics.

Can you make up some "statistics" to support your assertion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

Asexual people represent app. 1% of the population. That's lower than the estimated percentage of homosexual people (which is estimated at between 5 and 10%, usually).

Funny; I read that wikipedia article and discovered that

Based on the results, respondents were given a score ranging from 0 to 100 for hetero-eroticism and from 0 to 100 for homo-eroticism. Respondents who scored lower than 10 on both were labeled "asexual." This consisted of 5% of the males and 10% of the females.

So, right about the same as homosexuals.

Not that you aren't entitled to quote-mine for your "statistics;" this is the internet, and there are only three kinds of statistics on the internet:  lies, fucking lies, and "Polish lawyer" lies.

[Martinus]

Further empirical data about an asexual demographic appeared in 1994, when a research team in the United Kingdom carried out a comprehensive survey of 18,876 British residents, spurred by the need for sexual information in the wake of the AIDS epidemic. The survey included a question on sexual attraction, to which a significant 1% of respondents replied that they had "never felt sexually attracted to anyone at all."[1] This phenomenon was seized upon by the Canadian sexuality researcher Dr. Anthony Bogaert, who explored the asexual demographic in a series of studies.[1][1] The 1% statistic from the UK survey is the one most frequently quoted as the possible incidence of asexuality in the general population, though it should be considered very tentative. Assuming this statistic holds true, the world population of asexual people would stand at over 60 million.

Kinsey's study also came up with app. 1%.

[Valmy]

Of course in the UK only 1% identify as gay or Lesbian also.

Almost three-quarters of a million UK adults say they are gay, lesbian or bisexual - equivalent to 1.5% of the population, a survey suggests.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) says 480,000 (1%) consider themselves gay or lesbian, and 245,000 (0.5%) bisexual.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11398629

[Tamas]

WTF does GoT have to do with gays and their numbers in society? Fuck that.

Episode 7 is awesome.

I so hated these parts in the book, as the world you learned about falls right apart in front of your eyes. The TV series is giving that back very nicely.

[Valmy]

WTF does GoT have to do with gays and their numbers in society? Fuck that.

It seems Marty has determined Brynden Blackfish not marrying means he is either asexual or gay since no heterosexual man ever did not want to get married.  Since there are so few asexuals ergo he must be gay...or something.

[crazy canuck]

The show is becoming boring.  It doesnt capture the scale of the books.  The King of the Seven kingdoms heading out on foot with three others to hunt?  Instead of going low budget on that scene why not do what the book did and simply let the audience know that a big hunt has been arranged and then tell the audience what happened when the news of the "accident" gets back to the castle? As an added bonus we wouldnt have to see Renly coming off as a whiney little brother.  Its getting to the point I will be cheering when he dies.

The Tournament was a disaster.  There could at least have been some dialogue around all the events of the tournament and that all the knights of the Seven Kingdoms were coming to compete.  It would have been an easy thing to introduce concepts like the knight with the flaming sword in dialogue if they didnt have the budget to actually show it.  That kind of dialogue would have been a lot better than wasting time on Little Finger telling Sansa about the Hound - which was out of charcter and sequence.

Also, the heir to Winterfell goes off riding in the woods with his little brother to try out his new saddle with no escort - not even the wolves?

I turned it off when Sansa's scene started.  I might pick it up again out of curiousity.

[Viking]

cc - I suppose they are trying to conserve money for the long run. Apparently they are choosing to use the wolves as little as possible.

[Berkut]

I would agree with CC that they are kind of missing the "scale". The Kings Tourney seemed pretty small, for example. The entire thing seems rather small, like he said.

I don't agree that it is more than a minor negative though.

[Martinus]

Well you hunt a boar on foot tbh...