Anna Kendrick recommends drinking on a first date 'if sex is off the table

Actress Anna Kendrick stars in the upcoming comedy "Drinking Buddies," so GQ asked her some questions about drinking in its current issue.

Makes sense.

On what potential drinking side effect not to bring up on a first date...

Two subjects to never bring up on a first date are anything to do with the actual reality of your family, and, you know, liver cancer and how we’ve probably all got it.

On whether or not a guy should pay for the drinks on the first date...

Paying on a first date is a tricky thing because even though it’s meaningless, if a guy doesn’t, or doesn’t offer, it suggests poor judgment more than anything else.

On the potential benefits of drinking...

If sex is off the table, and you’re like “Let’s try to get to know each other,” I would recommend drinking. Highly.

And, on an unrelated note, on being asked for autographs whilst underwear shopping...

There’s something deeply embarrassing about being approached when you’re holding knickers. And it’s happened TWICE!

Queens teacher who had sex with 14-year-old student gets 6 months jail

A former Queens teacher was sentenced to six months in jail on Monday for sleeping with a 14-year-old student.

Daniel Reilly, 36, was also sentenced to ten years of probation, and has to register as a sex offender for being sexually active with the girl, who was one of his English students at IS 237.

Prosecutors: Florida teen in same-sex case contacted girl, so plea offer pulled

(CNN) -- Some 20,000 text messages, 25 photographs including nudes, and alleged secret meetings have prompted prosecutors to rescind a plea offer and request that bond be revoked for Florida teen Kaitlyn Hunt, charged with felonies in a sexual relationship with a 14-year-old girl, according to court papers.

Hunt, who turned 19 last Wednesday, was charged with two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery after the parents of a then-14-old schoolmate went to authorities in Indian River County saying Hunt had a sexual relationship with their daughter.

After the case gained nationwide publicity, Hunt was offered a plea deal in which she would not face jail time, nor would she have to wear an ankle bracelet or have to register as a sex offender.

But Florida Assistant State Attorney Christopher Taylor told CNN Monday that since learning about Hunt's alleged contact with the victim in this case, the state has taken the deal off the table.

Texts, photos and meetings would violate a no-contact court order issued in February as a condition of Hunt's being out of jail while awaiting trial.

Prosecutors now say in court papers that also in February, Hunt gave the girl an iPod. The device was used to receive and send about 20,000 text messages between the two, according to the court papers.

Hunt also is accused of sending photographs and videos to the girl, with the court papers saying "These photographs are explicit and depict the defendant nude ..."

Prosecutors included examples of texts they say Hunt sent to the girl, including: "(N)o matter what if they find out we talked I'm going to jail until trial starts."

The texts are proof that Hunt was "consciously and intentionally violating the court's order," prosecutors said in the papers.

Prosecutors also say that the younger girl told a detective that Hunt would drive her to "a remote location where they would have intimate physical contact." The court papers claim that the most recent meeting took place two weeks ago.

The Hunt family refused to comment and their attorney has not responded to CNN's request for an interview.

The case gained national attention when Hunt's family went public on Facebook after she was charged, detailing their daughter's case and essentially accusing the victim's family of going after their daughter because she is gay.

The victim's family said that isn't true and that they were only trying to protect their teenage daughter.

A judge will decide Tuesday whether Hunt's bond should be revoked and if that happens, she could be jailed.

Same-sex marriage in New Zealand: 9am the perfect time to say I do

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

After Rulings, Same-Sex Couples Grapple With Diverging State Laws

WASHINGTON — In the dining room of their town house here, David Huebner and John Barabino were the picture of prosperous domesticity this week. A housekeeper padded about, work on their outdoor patio continued and their 3-year-old son, Miles, napped upstairs.

But together, they put a human face on an uncomfortable truth: Mr. Huebner and Mr. Barabino’s union, although legal, is still not equal to that of their heterosexual friends, even after historic Supreme Court rulings to grant federal benefits to legally married gay couples and restore same-sex marriage in California.

While the plaintiff in the Defense of Marriage Act case, Edith Windsor, will get back $363,000 in federal estate taxes — “with interest,” her lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said — the future is not so clear for Mr. Huebner and Mr. Barabino. They married in California (before the now-overturned ban) and adopted their son there. Their primary home is in Utah, which does not recognize their marriage. But they live part time in Washington, which does.

They are among thousands of legally married same-sex couples, wed in one state but living in another, caught in a confusing web of laws and regulations. It is a predicament the Obama administration is only beginning to grapple with: how to extend federal rights and benefits to same-sex couples when states, not the federal government, dictate who is married.

“The couples in those states also have skim-milk marriages,” said Ms. Kaplan, referring to a remark by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. “It’s just the flip side, in the sense that they may have marriages that are recognized by federal law, but not state law.”

Taxes are a big concern. The Internal Revenue Service will determine whether Mr. Huebner, 40, a psychology professor at the University of Utah, and Mr. Barabino, 44, a former Google executive and stay-at-home father, may file jointly and claim the marriage deduction long offered to heterosexual couples. But no matter what the agency decides, they must still file separately in Utah.

Should one die in Washington, the other would receive Social Security benefits because of the court’s decision, legal experts said. But in Utah, the surviving spouse would get nothing since federal law dictates payments based on the “state of domicile,” not the “state of celebration.” Only Congress can change that.

“There are two standards,” Mr. Huebner said. Given their residence in two states, “for us, it’s even more complicated.”

Eliminating these cross-border inequities and making same-sex marriage the law of the land is the next frontier for gay rights advocates. A day after the ruling, Chad H. Griffin, the president of the Human Rights Campaign, appeared at a gay community center in Utah — where gay couples cannot adopt and even domestic partnerships are banned — to draw a pointed distinction with California, where gay men and lesbians will be able to begin marrying again soon.

“We cannot tolerate the persistence of two Americas when it comes to equality,” Mr. Griffin said.

If the prospect of “two Americas” is a problem for Mr. Griffin, it also troubles Brian S. Brown, the president of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative advocacy group. In an interview, he vowed to “roll back gay marriage” wherever it exists, adding, “Ultimately, as Lincoln said, we can’t have a country half slave and half free.”

There are an estimated 650,000 same-sex couples in the United States, and 114,000 of them are legally married, according to the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles. It will be easy for the federal government to extend more than 1,000 benefits to those living in states where they wed. For the rest, the path is murkier.

After their daughter, Soleil, was born six years ago, Mindy Stokes and Katie Rathmell left Florida for a friendlier climate in Oregon, where they registered as domestic partners. Last year, same-sex marriage became legal in neighboring Washington State. Two weeks ago, they drove across the Columbia River from their home in Astoria, crossed the border and had a wedding.

Ms. Rathmell, a research associate for an oceanography group at Oregon Health and Science University, provides the family’s health insurance but has been paying taxes on the benefit for Ms. Stokes and their daughter. The couple is hoping that will change soon. Even if it does, they still expect to pay more for other coverage, like car insurance. Without an Oregon marriage certificate, they do not get a marriage discount.

“I have rights to visit Katie in the hospital, and we can leave property to each other, I think,” Ms. Stokes said. “But it’s so complicated and convoluted. It would be much easier and cheaper if it just passed nationwide.”

Angela Hughey and Sheri Owens, who married in California but live in Arizona, were so eager for the court’s decision that they contacted the I.R.S. in March and received instructions on how to file a request to amend past returns. But Ms. Hughey, whose business, One Community, caters to gay professionals, said that taxes were hardly her chief concern. Arizona is one of 29 states that still allow discrimination based on sexual orientation.

“You’re talking about a community that is treated with great disrespect and disregard,” she said.

Advocates are hoping that Wednesday’s rulings will create new momentum for other gay rights advances, like passing a federal law barring employment discrimination. As for marriage, their goal is to build “a critical mass of states and a critical mass of public support that together create a climate for the Supreme Court to finish the job,” said Evan Wolfson, founder of Freedom to Marry, an advocacy group.

In the meantime, the maze of laws has created a boon for lawyers who advise same-sex couples on matters like adoption and estate planning. Among them is Laura Milliken Gray of Salt Lake City, who said she goes through “all kinds of gyrations” for couples who “want to achieve family equality that their straight brothers and sisters have.”

Ms. Gray advised one client, Craig Crawford, who sells computer networks in Salt Lake City, that he would have to write all possible heirs — his parents, siblings and their children — out of his will to ensure that his property could be left to his husband, who is technically not next of kin under Utah law. Mr. Crawford was stunned.

“When you have to write your mother’s name down and disown her,” he said, “that is really harsh.”

Same-sex couples have long made decisions about where to live, work and raise children based on the legal climate. That is true of Mr. Huebner and Mr. Barabino, who met in San Francisco when Mr. Huebner was teaching there and Mr. Barabino was working for Google.

Through two moves — one to Washington, where Mr. Huebner taught briefly at the University of Maryland, and then to Salt Lake City — they kept their home in San Francisco. Once living in Utah, their California residency became important, Mr. Huebner said, because they needed access to the California courts to adopt a child.

When they moved to Utah, Mr. Huebner said, “it wasn’t important that the state doesn’t recognize our marriage,” because neither did the federal government. But with the court decision, he is beginning to wonder. “If by choosing to live in Utah we are choosing not to have federal rights,” he said, “it changes my decision matrix.”

When the rulings came down on Wednesday, the couple took Miles to the Supreme Court to watch history being made. There, they met up with friends who have a baby and a 3-year-old. While the toddlers romped on a lawn across the street from the court, the parents checked their cellphones for news. A cheer went up from the crowd when the Defense of Marriage decision was announced.

“We’re married!” Mr. Barabino said, cradling Miles in his arms. “It’s crazy. Because of the soil that we’re standing on now, because we stand in D.C., we’re married. When we stand in Utah, we are not.”

Sex and the H.I.V. Morning-After Pill

I RECENTLY had a serious H.I.V. scare after an episode of unprotected sex. The next day, at Whitman-Walker, a clinic in Washington that specializes in treating gay patients, I began a monthlong regimen of the drug Truvada, a form of post-exposure prophylaxis, or PEP. It has to be taken within 72 hours after potential contact with the virus that causes AIDS. The price tag would normally be $1,200, but I was able to get a subsidy the manufacturer gives to low-income earners.

“You can only get this deal once,” my doctor warned.

“Jeez, I hope so,” I said. “I mean, it’s not like there are PEP regulars, right?”

She sighed. “Oh, there are.”

More than 30 years since AIDS emerged, and two decades since antiretroviral drugs transformed that epidemic into a chronic but manageable disease, conversations about H.I.V. remain awkward, especially for gay men.

When were you last tested? Did you test only for antibodies, or was it a full polymerase chain reaction test? What have you done sexually since you last tested negative?

It can be tough to rekindle any bedroom passion after such questions come up.

Two recent developments could make these conversations less awkward, or even render them moot. But they also raise troubling questions about promiscuity and responsibility that are reminiscent of debates from the 1980s.

The first development was the approval, last summer, by the Food and Drug Administration of an over-the-counter rapid-response at-home H.I.V. test kit. The test, called OraQuick and available nationwide since October, gives results 20 minutes after a cheek swab. The second is the increasing availability of PEP and of pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP.

PEP — the medication I am taking — has been called the H.I.V. morning-after pill, and PrEP, to follow the analogy, is akin to birth control. A study in the British medical journal The Lancet this month found that drug-injecting addicts who took PrEP were half as likely to become infected with H.I.V. as those who did not; other studies have shown that the drug reduces transmission of the virus from mother to child, and transmission among both gay men and heterosexuals.

The at-home OraQuick tests, at $20 a pop, are a bigger phenomenon than drugs like Truvada, which can be used as either a pre-exposure or a post-exposure prophylaxis, and can cost more than $10,000 a year.

A study by Columbia University researchers, published last year in the journal AIDS and Behavior, found that the at-home tests could be effective if widely used. It gave at-home testing kits to 27 gay men who reported having routine unprotected sex. Over three months, the 27 men had a collective total of 140 sexual partners; 124 of them were asked to submit to testing before sex, and 101 agreed. Of the 101, 10 tested positive (six learned of their H.I.V. status that way). None of the men had sex with a partner after learning that the partner tested positive.

The at-home test, OraQuick, also is not a sure thing. It tests only for antibodies, which sometimes don’t emerge for months after infection. So the newly infected, who are 8 to 10 times more likely to be infectious, can still test as negative.

As for the pre- and post-exposure pills, cost is not the only barrier. Of 403 H.I.V.-negative gay men surveyed in a different study by Columbia researchers, only half said they would take PrEP on a regular basis. A 22-year-old art director on the Lower East Side told me of a recent scare he had after he took home a handsome but sometimes homeless man he met at a bar. Very drunk, they had unprotected sex. The next morning the art director panicked, but eschewed the post-exposure pills, he told me, because “I’m pretty health-conscious and careful about what I put in my body, especially medicine.” (Weeks later, he did a regular H.I.V. test, which came up negative.)

Dan Savage, the nationally syndicated sex columnist who coined the concept of “monogamish” relationships, expressed similar worry, fearing that clinicians do not understand the psychology of the population they’re trying to help. “The guys these sensible health care folks are trying to reach are not sensible,” he told me. “They are self-identified idiots who can only be saved by a vaccine.” Right now, in the final weekend of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month, it is a good moment to reflect on these issues. In the nearly two decades since “Rent” and “Angels in America,” a generation has grown up in a world where AIDS did not equal death. That has led to a complacency that helps explain a troubling increase in new H.I.V. infections among young men who have sex with men.

I fear that, for all their potential benefits, at-home tests and the new pre- and post-exposure H.I.V. medications might give some gay men an exaggerated sense of safety, and encourage the promiscuity that Larry Kramer, the playwright and activist, has spent so many years railing against.

When a gay crowd gathered Wednesday on Christopher Street, where the modern gay liberation movement was born in 1969, to celebrate the Supreme Court’s rulings on same-sex marriage, there was much cheering and talk about progress. But I wondered what the crowd did with the rest of their night.

Have Sex? No, Then Browse our Video Clips and Get to know that how to do Sex