Search

"Unfair" Australia Day ban sparks outrage

A camping area in Bundeena has been slammed for making the "unfair" decision to ban boats and jet skis from Australia Day celebrations, with locals claiming they were left in the dark about the decision. The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service will ban people from releasing their boats and jet skis from the access point at Bonnie Vale over the long weekend - the most popular time of the year to use the facility. The access point will be shut from 9pm on Friday, January 24 to 7am on Tuesday, January 28. Local Andrew Petty said he paid more than $300 for a camping holiday with his family and intended to take his kids fishing, but their plans have been derailed because of the ban. "We have one of the most beautiful waterways for all to use," he said. "We pay our boating licence, registration, fishing licence, national park entry fee, camping fee, and are denied access to the only ramp on that side of the Port Hacking." Petty added that he would have to drive more than an hour away to find another ramp to launch his boat, and believed he was paying the price for irresponsible jet ski users. "Maritime don't have the resources to prevent jet ski hooning so their alternative is to just force close the ramp and hire in traffic cops to police ramp access," he said. He believed that the ban was "unfair" because a lot of the traffic comes from jet ski users coming from the other side of Port Hacking. Another local called the move "another example of a government agency creating a problem instead of looking for more practical solutions." Locals also argued that the boat ramp offered a safe access point for leaving the isolated area in an emergency. The Port Hacking River is known for jet ski infringements in NSW and authorities claim they cause significant traffic congestion on nearby roads when the Royal National Park is full. They also said they hoped the closure would also improve safety for swimmers. "Public safety is always our number one priority and this temporary closure ensures Bonnie Vale remains a safer and more enjoyable space for all visitors over the long weekend," NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Royal area manager Brendon Neilly said. NSW Maritime officer Jay Ruming added that the state had recorded 1,700 jet-ski infringements in the past 12 months. "Our data tells us that jet skis are heavily over-represented in serious injury incidents. People involved in an accident on a jet ski have a 50 per cent likelihood they'll suffer a serious injury," he said. Image: Facebook

Travel Trouble

Aussie locals call for tourist ban on popular island

Residents in Western Australia are urging the government to put a ban on tourists travelling to a popular island near Perth to help protect a dwindling little penguin population. Penguin Island is located about 53km south of Perth and is home to 114 little penguins, a decline in the bird’s population by 94 per cent since 2007. Save Rockingham’s Little Penguins activist Dawn Jecks said while climate change has made an impact on the dwindling number of penguins in the area, over tourism has also affected the penguins' habitat. “It’s essentially open slather in terms of visitors accessing the areas where the penguins try to cool off,” she said. “There’s nowhere on the beach they can go where they’re not going to be hounded, touched or picked up by visitors." Ms Jecks said about 25 per cent of little penguin deaths occurred by boat strikes with the area seeing an increase of watercraft in recent years. "They need to close down the island for a few years to let the population recover,” she said. Ms Jecks is one of many campaigning for the government to ban recreational boating and tourism on the island, saying it would be shameful if authorities did not act to save the little penguins in an area where the creatures were part of the city of Rockingham’s cultural identity. “How stupid is it going to look when we have Penguin Rd, penguins on the entry sign to Rockingham, penguins on the city’s coat of arms and penguins on the kid’s school jumpers but no penguins,” she said. A WA government spokesman said Penguin Island was an iconic part of WA, and the government was committed to supporting its penguin population. “The health and wellbeing of the penguins will always be the state government’s top priority when it comes to planning for the island," the spokesman said. “Tourism, however, also plays an important role on the island by educating visitors about the penguins and promoting enjoyment of our State’s natural environment.” Image credits: Facebook

Domestic Travel

Australia passes world-first social media ban for children under-16

Children under-16 will be banned from using social media from the end of next year, after the world-first legislation passed the parliament on Thursday. The law means that anyone under the age of 16 will be blocked from using platforms including TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat and Facebook among others, and will make the platforms liable with fines of up to $50 million for failing to prevent these children from holding social media accounts. The Senate passed the bill 34 votes to 19 last Thursday, with The House of Representatives approving the legislation by 102 votes to 13 on Wednesday. The platforms will have one year to work out how to implement the ban before penalties are enforced, however the laws have received mixed reviews from tech companies and mental health experts alike. Meta Platforms, which owns Facebook and Instagram, said the legislation had been “rushed.” Digital Industry Group Inc., an advocate for the platforms in Australia, also questioned how it would work and the impact it would have on children. “The social media ban legislation has been released and passed within a week and, as a result, no one can confidently explain how it will work in practice – the community and platforms are in the dark about what exactly is required of them,” DIGI managing director Sunita Bose said. The platforms cannot force people to provide government-issued identity documents, including the Digital ID, to assess their age. “This policy will hurt vulnerable young people the most, especially in regional communities and especially the LGBTQI community, by cutting them off,” Greens senator David Shoebridge said. Mental health experts agreed that the social media ban could dangerously isolate children who used social media to find support. Christopher Stone, executive director of Suicide Prevention Australia, added the legislation failed to consider positive aspects of social media in supporting young people's mental health. “The government is running blindfolded into a brick wall by rushing this legislation. Young Australians deserve evidence-based policies, not decisions made in haste,” Stone said in a statement. Online safety campaigner Sonya Ryan, whose 15-year-old daughter Carly was murdered by a 50-year-old pedophile who pretended to be a teenager online, described the Senate vote as a “monumental moment in protecting our children from horrendous harms online," in an email to the AP. Wayne Holdsworth, a father whose son took his own life following a sextortion scam, also approved the decision to introduce the age restriction. Meta Platforms has responded to the new laws saying: “Naturally, we respect the laws decided by the Australian Parliament." “However, we are concerned about the process which rushed the legislation through while failing to properly consider the evidence, what industry already does to ensure age-appropriate experiences, and the voices of young people.” Image: BigTunaOnline / Shutterstock.com

Technology

"Just words on a piece of paper": Olympian's blunt response to lifetime ban

Olympic cycling medallist Matthew Richardson has responded to the <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/travel/travel-trouble/olympian-slapped-with-lifetime-ban-after-defection" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lifetime ban</a> he received as "just words on a piece of paper" that "don't carry much weight for me" following his defection to ride for Great Britain. The 25-year-old Olympian received a lot of backlash after his post-Paris defection where he won three medals for Australia despite knowing that he was going to switch to represent his country of birth. While Richardson was proud of his decision, he did express a bit of "shock" at the ban. "I didn't know it was coming," Richardson said during a UCI Track Champions League press conference. "I found it quite interesting. I guess they were just keen to get one last, final blow, one last, final word. "But ultimately, I had left three months ago. I'm not sure where the confusion ... has come from, but I thought it was pretty obvious that, by wanting to ride for GB for the rest of my career, that would mean I didn't want to ride for Australia for the rest of my career. It's almost like you leave your job, and three months later, they go, 'Well, you're fired!'. "It's just words on a piece of paper, really, and they don't really carry much weight for me." In a statement on Monday, AusCycling said that it had investigated the prospect of a two-year non-compete clause being enforced, but discovered it was "legally unenforceable". "The UCI can't enforce regulations on me that I haven't signed for," Richardson said. "That was just words on a piece of paper that, again, don't hold any weight. "As they also said in that review, they're going to have to go back and have a look at that clause, which basically just admits that they're going to have to change it or get rid of it, or whatever, because it clearly has no meaning." Richardson was born in Maidstone, Kent but moved to Perth at the age of nine. He took up cycling with Perth's Midland Cycling Club and not long after was riding with Western Australian Institute of Sport (WAIS). Richardson brushed aside claims that he had threatened AusCycling’s intellectual property by asking to take his bike with him after the Paris Olympics, and said he'd "always been respectful to AusCycling" as well as "thankful for everything" the organisation had done for him. "I really did think I repaid them with all the results, you know — the world championship, the three Olympic medals that I returned," Richardson added. "Unfortunately, noise was created around the issue, but I sleep well at night knowing that noise didn't come from myself. "Hopefully in the years to come, myself and AusCycling can come to some sort of understanding. "But for now, there we go. They've had their final word. "Hopefully we can just put it to bed and just enjoy riding in circles." Images: Instagram

Legal

Olympian slapped with lifetime ban after defection

Olympic cycling medallist Matthew Richardson has been banned from representing Australia for life following his unexpected defection to British racing immediately following his dual-silver performance at the Paris 2024 Games. Richardson, celebrated for his impressive performances on the velodrome, reportedly made his decision to defect amid a complex mix of personal and professional factors. While specific details surrounding his departure remain scarce, sources close to the athlete suggest that he sought new opportunities abroad, leading to his controversial choice. AusCycling has imposed strict sanctions on the 25-year-old athlete, effectively ending his potential future with the Australian national team. The cycling body conducted a thorough review of Richardson's actions, finding that he deliberately withheld his intentions to change nationality from AusCycling, his teammates, and key stakeholders. Critically, Richardson requested that the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) delay disclosing his nationality change until after the Olympic Games, a request supported by British Cycling. AusCycling's sanctions include three key provisions: Richardson will not be eligible to rejoin the Australian Cycling Team at any point in the future, he is prohibited from using any resources associated with the Australian Cycling Team or its partners, and he is ineligible for any AusCycling-related awards. The track sprinter, who was born in England but moved to Australia at age nine, won silver medals in the individual sprint and men's keirin, and a bronze in the team sprint at the Paris Olympics. He has since made his debut for Great Britain, winning two events in the UCI Track Champions League. AusCycling attempted to impose a two-year non-competition clause but found it legally unenforceable. Richardson will be eligible to represent Great Britain in international competitions from early next year, following a brief UCI-mandated waiting period. Jesse Korf, AusCycling's Executive General Manager of Performance, released a statement saying: “These decisions underscore AusCycling’s adherence to the values of the Australian National Team and our broader commitment to the principle of Win Well. “Integrity, respect and trust are foundational to our team and organisation, and we remain focused on fostering an environment that upholds these standards.” Richardson, meanwhile, has expressed excitement about his new sporting journey, describing his first race for Great Britain as "a dream come true". Image: Olympics.com

Travel Trouble

"We're giving them weapons": Charlotte O'Brien's parents call for social media ban

The parents of a young girl who took her own life after being bullied have joined a campaign to raise the age limit for social media. Charlotte O'Brien was a student at Santa Sabina College in Sydney’s inner west, where she dealt with relentless bullying which led to the 12-year-old's tragic death. Now, her parents Mat Howard and Kelly O’Brien appeared on 60 Minutes to ask “how many more Charlottes do we need to lose” before action was taken to protect kids from harm online. When asked if she believed Charlotte would still be alive if social media was off limits to young children, Ms O’Brien replied: “Absolutely”. “My personal opinion. Giving our kids these phones, we’re giving them weapons, we’re giving them the world at their fingertips,” the grieving mother said. In the days after the young girl's death, it was revealed her parents had pleaded with her school to address “friendship issues” Charlotte was facing. Mr Howard told 60 Minutes that despite her “ongoing struggles” the last two weeks of Charlotte’s life were “the best two weeks that I can remember with her”, adding, "We thought we were really turning the corner.” “You know she’d come home from school that day and she’d had a great day. Kelly had made her favourite dinner that night. And that night she skipped off to bed, literally skipped. And we never saw her again.” Her family revealed a “completely distressed” Charlotte spoke to a friend on her phone the night she died, and shared messages she had been sent online. “So we can’t say exactly what we’ve been told, but what I will tell you is what we’ve been told is some of the worst words that anybody should have to read, let alone a 12-year-old girl,” Mr Howard said. Recalling the heart-wrenching moment they found their daughter's body, Ms O'Brien said she pleaded for answers from police on how she would've taken her own life. “I just kept saying to the police that morning, ‘Where did she get the knowledge and the means? Where did she get the knowledge and the means?’,” she said. “I couldn’t wrap my head around it, and he (the police officer) just said to me, ‘This is the age of information. She just needed to Google it’. And for me, I’m so devastated by that because I gave her that phone.” Charlotte’s parents have travelled to Canberra to meet with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, ahead of legislation to raise the age of using social media from 13 to 16. “I intend to say, ‘Please, Mr. Albanese, raise the age of social media to 16, because 36 months could change a lifetime’. That’s what I’m going to say,” Ms O’Brien said. Mr Howard said, “Charlotte was not the first and she’s already not the last. And this will continue to happen unless we make the right decisions.” The controversial bill to raise the age on social media platforms is set to go before Australia’s federal parliament this week, with support from both major parties. Need to talk to someone? Don't go it alone. Call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or visit lifeline.org.au Beyond Blue: 1300 224 636 SANE: 1800 187 263; saneforums.org Image credits: 2GB / Kids Helpline

Caring

Fitness influencer gets lifetime ban from NYC marathon for filming content

A Texas social media influencer has been disqualified and banned from future races at the New York City marathon. Last weekend, fitness influencer Matthew Choi ran the race with his camera crew on e-bikes, endangering other runners. He finished the 42.2-kilometre course with a time of 2:57:15, about 50 minutes behind Abdi Nageeye, the winner of the men's race. Choi issued an apology to his 400,000 followers after receiving the lifetime ban. "I have no excuses, full-stop," he said on Wednesday AEDT. "I was selfish on Sunday to have my brother and my videographer follow me around on e-bikes, and it had serious consequences. "We endangered other runners, we impacted people going for PBs, we blocked people from getting water and with the New York City Marathon being about everyone else and the community, I made it about myself. "And for anyone I impacted, I'm sorry." He added that the decision "was 100 per cent on me" as he did not receive pressure to film content from any partners or sponsors. New York Road Runners, the organisers of the race, said in a statement that Choi's actions violated the code of conduct and competition rules. "One of the incidents brought to NYRR's attention was that Choi ran with the assistance of two unauthorised people riding the course on electric bicycles, obstructing runners," the group said. The fitness influencer posted several videos of him running the marathon on social media, which immediately drew backlash. "As a runner, seeing him was amazing. Gave me extra motivation to pass him and make sure I never had to see him and his dumb crew for the rest of the race," wrote one user on Reddit. He has since acknowledged the criticism and has vowed to stop the practice. "It won't happen again. My word is my bond." Images: Instagram

Travel Trouble

Why Sam Newman could be banned from the MCG

Sam Newman could face a two-year ban from the MCG over this one simple act. The former AFL player, who has been a member of the Melbourne Cricket Club for more than 50 years, could be banned from next year's Grand Final after he revealed that he had "transferred a ticket" to his son's friend earlier this week. “My son said ‘have you got any tickets?’ I said ‘No, but I get a ticket from the MCG because I am a member’,” he explained on his You Cannot Be Serious podcast. “I said ‘why don’t you get one from the MCG’? “So he applied and got one and he had a friend in Perth who he gave the ticket to. “Then he called me on the day and said his friend couldn’t get in because ‘they said he was trying to impersonate you’ (Newman) and ‘that the other bit of bad news is you have been suspended from going to next year’s grand final because you have tried to sneak someone in on your ticket’. “I had no intention of trying to sneak anyone in. I just thought if I get issued a ticket I can give it to someone," he continued. Despite the suspension, the former footy star said he "couldn't care less" about the potential suspension. “Ignorance is bliss. I don’t care if they ban me from every Grand Final because while they go on with that pompous, arrogant, nonsense beforehand (the Welcome to Country), I just won’t go.” In a statement shared to the Herald Sun, the MCC noted that all members were advised of the restrictions around tickets for the Brisbane Lions vs Sydney Swans grand final ahead of the game. “The Melbourne Cricket Club does not make comment in relation to disciplinary matters and all members must adhere to the Club’s Code of Conduct,” a spokesperson said. “Eligible members of the Melbourne Cricket Club were able to access the 2024 AFL Grand Final subject to membership restrictions which were communicated to members in advance of the event.” Newman will wait to see whether he will receive any punishment, which would range from a membership suspension or restrictions between six months and two years. Images: X

Legal

Airline bans couple after racist row over reclined seat

Two travellers have been banned from Cathay Pacific flights after an argument over seat etiquette descended into racist insults. The incident occurred on a flight from Hong Kong to London, with a woman documenting her experience in a video posted on Xiaohongshu, China's version of Instagram. The woman, from mainland China, explained, "The lady sitting behind me asked me to put my seat up because it was blocking her husband's view of the TV. I politely declined, and she started stretching her feet onto my armrest, kicking my arm and cursing at me like crazy." A flight attendant stepped in to find a solution to the issue, but when the woman continued to refuse to put her chair up, the situation only escalated. "When (the female passenger) realised my Cantonese wasn't so great, she started throwing around some nasty comments, calling me a 'Mainland girl' and other derogatory stuff," the woman said, explaining how people from Hong Kong speak mainly Cantonese, whereas mainland Chinese mainly speak Mandarin. "Once I started recording, the husband behind me even shoved his hand on my armrest and started shaking it like crazy. I felt my personal space had been completely violated," added the woman, who said other passengers then intervened. In footage of the incident uploaded by the woman, a female voice can be heard saying in Mandarin: "You're old enough — why are you bullying a young girl?" And others can be heard shouting in Cantonese: "You're embarrassing us Hongkongers!" "After some passengers spoke up for me, the flight attendant finally said I could switch seats. I felt it was absurd—what if no one had backed me up? Would I have just been left to deal with it on my own?" the passenger said. "As a major airline, isn't Cathay supposed to know how to handle such disputes? Shouldn't treating passengers differently get some consequences? In a statement released Saturday, Cathay Pacific said it wanted to "sincerely apologise" for the "unpleasant experience," with the airline saying, "We maintain a zero-tolerance policy for any behaviour that violates aviation safety regulations or disrespects the rights of other customers." "We will deny future travel on any Cathay Group flights to the two customers involved in this incident." Image credits: Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

"Enough is enough": Pauline Hanson calls for ban on Welcome to Country

Pauline Hanson has called for a ban on Welcome to Country ceremonies at events, after an unusual version of the acknowledgement was performed at the AFL semi-final on Saturday. Aboriginal Elder Brendan Kerin performed the unique Welcome at Sydney’s Engie Stadium on Saturday night, sparking widespread debate as Kerin tried to explain that the Welcome to Country ceremony is intended to welcome all visitors to the land they have gathered on, rather than welcoming people to Australia itself. He also added other seemingly divisive aspects to his speech, stating the ceremony was not “invented to cater for white people” and Aboriginal people have been conducting the ceremony “for 250,000 years-plus”. After the controversial Welcome, One Nation senator Pauline Hanson took to X to call the ceremonies “racially divisive” and declaring her belief Australians are “sick and tired of them”. “As I have said in the past, these Welcome to Country and Acknowledgement of Country performances are one of the most racially divisive features of modern discourse in Australia,” she began. “Australians are sick and tired of them. They are sick of being told Australia is not their country, which is what these things effectively do. Welcomes and acknowledgements deny the citizenship and sovereignty held equally by all Australians and they need to stop." Hanson concluded her post by stating: “Australians should not be forced to participate in or be subjected to these divisive performances. Enough is enough.” While many of Hanson's followers were quick to agree with her comments, others said that they have often observed the Welcome to Country be respected and applauded, and said Elder Kerin's version of the acknowledgment was "informative" and "really respectful". One person wrote, “This welcome to country will have annoyed all of the right people.” <p style="box-sizing: inherit; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-size-adjust: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Image credits: Getty Images

Legal

“Enough is enough”: Albanese to introduce social media ban for children

Australian children could soon be banned from accessing social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok amid growing concerns around its impacts on young minds. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed on Tuesday that his government would introduce landmark legislation to enforce a minimum age limit for access to social media, with the minimum age yet to be determined. This follows similar announcements made from Victoria and South Australia, with SA proposing an outright ban for kids under 13 and parental consent between the ages of 14 and 15, an option that is being considered to be implemented across the country. “We are taking this action because enough is enough,” Albanese said in a statement provided before the announcement. “Parents are worried sick about this. “The safety and mental and physical health of our young people is paramount.” The legislation will be introduced before the end of this year, after an age verification trial, although the age limits and start date have yet to be finalised. The government said the legislation would be worked on in national cabinet and draw on a report by former High Court Chief Justice Robert French commissioned by the SA government and released on Sunday. The report includes a draft bill to ban children under 14 from social media and making mandatory for companies to gain parental consent for 14 and 15-year-olds to use their platforms. On Tuesday morning, Albanese told Sunrise host Natalie Barr that he wanted to see kids “off their devices and on to the footy fields or the netball courts to get them interacting with real people having real experiences." “And we know that social media is doing social harm. “We want to make sure we get it right, but we want to make sure as well that we act which is why we have said we will introduce legislation before the end of this year." When the Sunrise host pointed out that "no country in the world has successfully been able to do this," with young teens finding alternative ways to access adult sites including using a VPN, Albanese replied: “that is why we are doing the trial to get it right”. “If it was easy it would have been done around the world. But just because something is hard doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t try. “We want to work with parents to work with companies, to work with state and territory governments to make sure that we act in this area.” Albanese also said that allowing children unfettered access to smartphones and social media have had devastating impacts for some families, including through online bullying and access to material which causes social harm. “The safety and mental and physical health of our young people is paramount,’’ he said. “We are taking this action because enough is enough.” Investigations, trials and negotiations with social media companies are currently ongoing, with Albanese saying the social media giants also needed to take responsibility. “They’re not above everyone else. They can’t just say, ‘We’re a big multinational company. We can do whatever we like’, regardless of the harm that’s being caused,” he said. SA Premier Peter Malinauskas, who led the change to introduce the bans, said his state’s bill would require platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and TikTok to ensure they took all reasonable steps to prevent children from getting access. “This is a problem that demands swift and decisive leadership, and I thank the Prime Minister for demonstrating it,’’ the SA Premier said. “The evidence shows early access to addictive social media is causing our kids harm. “This is no different to cigarettes or alcohol. When a product or service hurts children, governments must act.” The National Cabinet discussed the issue formally and informally last week, with all jurisdictions committed to tackling the issue. Image: Viktollio / Shutterstock.com

Legal

Lollipop man slapped with ban over "innocent" gesture

A beloved lollipop man in Victoria has been banned from high-fiving children after receiving a complaint from a concerned parent. John Goulden is a much-loved elderly lollipop man at the Mount Dandenong Primary School in Greater Melbourne, and will no longer be able to high five kids as they leave and enter the school grounds. Goulden, who was recently crowned one of Victoria’s top crossing supervisors, was reprimanded by Yarra Ranges Council who warned him against “initiating unnecessary physical contact” with the children. Outraged parents in the community have rallied behind the cherished lollipop man, with one parent, Rohan Bradley, even starting a petition to have the ban removed, saying that Mr Goulden has an “infectious joy that leaves a lasting impression on students and parents”. “His high fives in the morning and afternoon have become a tradition that many children look forward to, a small gesture that symbolises the warmth and friendliness of our unique community,” he said. “Sadly, this tradition is under threat. With our children’s happiness and wellbeing hanging in the balance, we need to take action.” Mr Bradley said it was not just about a simple high five but about “preserving our unique community’s spirit”. “We implore those in charge to let John continue to high-five his students, preserving an act that sparks joy and promotes a more positive learning environment,” he said. The petition has already gained more than 500 signatures as parents and students stand with the “community’s morale booster”. In a statement, Yarra Ranges Council confirmed they had received a complaint from a parent at the school about the crossing supervisor dishing out high fives. “Council’s internal policies and the Victorian Standards clearly states that unacceptable behaviours includes: Exhibiting behaviours with children and young people which may be construed as unnecessarily physical,” they told 9News. “Council has reminded the contractor who is currently supervising children at the Mount Dandenong Primary School of expectations of the role regarding interactions with children.” Image credits: Facebook

Legal

Woman banned for life from airline for bizarre reason

A woman has recalled the moment she was told by a major airline that she has been placed on the no-fly list for a very strange reason. Erin Wright, a 24-year-old from the US, was travelling to her sister's bachelorette party in New Mexico and was preparing to board her flight from New Orleans with American Airlines. When she kept running into errors online as she tried to check into the flight, she headed to the airport to sort out the issue, only to be told she was allegedly banned from the airline for life for “having sexual relations with a man on a flight while intoxicated”. The ban came as a shock for one key reason. “I am a 24-year-old lesbian. You see me. Am I having sexual relations with any man? No,” Erin laughed in her now viral TikTok. <div class="embed" style="font-size: 16px; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; outline: currentcolor !important;"><iframe class="embedly-embed" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; border-style: none; vertical-align: baseline; width: 600px; max-width: 100%; outline: currentcolor !important;" title="tiktok embed" src="https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2Fembed%2Fv2%2F7400894263237610794&display_name=tiktok&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2F%40erin_wright_%2Fvideo%2F7400894263237610794%3Fembed_source%3D121374463%252C121451205%252C121439635%252C121433650%252C121404359%252C121351166%252C121331973%252C120811592%252C120810756%253Bnull%253Bembed_name%26refer%3Dembed%26referer_url%3Dwww.news.com.au%252Ftravel%252Ftravel-updates%252Fincidents%252Fwomans-shock-after-she-was-banned-or-life-by-airline%252Fnews-story%252F98c05daffea9ff538dd05bbbbaca556b%26referer_video_id%3D7401685057980681514&image=https%3A%2F%2Fp19-sign.tiktokcdn-us.com%2Fobj%2Ftos-useast5-p-0068-tx%2FoYgBZAELUrpiZizB94QiB6qSIPFE1CosQNYUi%3Flk3s%3Db59d6b55%26nonce%3D34496%26refresh_token%3D518d47d36cd3175f1d18f1fd75262373%26x-expires%3D1723770000%26x-signature%3DPnErCHWVNghfrjSQPdFIU5OLZu4%253D%26shp%3Db59d6b55%26shcp%3D-&key=59e3ae3acaa649a5a98672932445e203&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=tiktok" width="340" height="700" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div> She said the gate staff couldn’t tell her why she was black-listed and it wasn’t until three weeks later the reason was revealed after several back and forth emails. “I got to the airport an hour and a half early, I went to the kiosk and asked them to check me in and they were really nice,” Erin explained in the clip that's amassed 2.6 million views. The airport staff then spent the next 10 minutes on the phone to try and work out the problem, while Erin was “freaking out” that she was going to miss her flight. “She gets off the phone and looks nervous. She said ‘ma’am I am really sorry to tell you this but you have actually been banned from flying American Airlines’,” Erin claimed. A confused Erin demanded to know the reason but the employee couldn’t disclose the information saying it was an issue of “internal security”, recalling in her video, “I was like, ‘what?’ because I’ve never done anything. ‘What did I get banned for, can you tell me?’” “I realised I am going to miss my [United Airlines] flight and luckily I booked another $1,000 round trip flight to New Orleans [with a different airline].” A few weeks after her trip and after several emails to the airline, they revealed that the reason she was banned, as Erin said, “I get an email from cooperate security telling me I am banned because I had sexual relations with a man on a flight while intoxicated.” “It took 12 days and many emails from me between when I contacted customer relations to when I actually got an email back.” She remained on the no-fly list and had to file an official appeal, as advised by corporate security. “I email them a very serious email, but also somewhat funny, because in it I am like ‘I don’t really know how to prove it wasn’t me except for the fact that I am literally a lesbian’," she said. “I can like get you letters from other people telling you that that’s the truth.” After three months, Erin said she was refunded the money for her flight and was taken off the no-fly list. In a follow up video, Erin said it has been a “super upsetting experience” adding she wasn’t compensated for the extra flight she had to book “because of their error”. Image credits: TikTok / Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

Huge names on board to overturn Hamish and Andy’s Olympic Village ban

Hamish and Andy's lifetime ban from entering the Olympic village could soon be overturned, as high profile supporters sign a petition for their return. Just last week the duo made headlines around the country when Andy revealed that he and Hamish copped the ban from the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in 2012, after they <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/travel/travel-trouble/hilarious-reason-why-hamish-and-andy-are-banned-for-life-from-olympic-village" target="_blank" rel="noopener">broke security protocols</a> at the London Games. The boys, who were invited to the event, could not get into the Olympic village due to a clerical error, so they decided to sneak in with the help of an Aussie who helped them get in through someone else's pass. After telling the hilarious story on air, Triple M's Rush Hour have launched a petition called: “We Urge the IOC to Revoke Hamish and Andy’s Olympic Ban.” Several high profile individuals have since signed the petition including Mark Geyer, Grant Hackett, Tom Rockliffe and Wil Anderson. And now, Queensland premier Steven Miles has also jumped on board. “This does sound like a real injustice to me,” he said on the show on Thursday. “I’ve been hearing about your campaign and I’ve signed the petition.” He also said that he would do whatever he can to convince the IOC to have the ban overturned by the time Brisbane hosts the Olympics in 2032. “I’ll do whatever I can to try to convince the IOC to make changes, and obviously come 2032, we’ll have some say in the arrangements then too,” he said. “Hamish and Andy, they’ve served their time, and it’s time to let them back in.” Image: Triple M

Travel Trouble

Hilarious reason why Hamish and Andy are "banned for life" from Olympic village

It's not easy to get banned from the Olympic village, but somehow Andy Lee and Hamish Blake have managed to do just that. Despite being warned to “not to talk about this ever”, Andy threw caution to the wind during an interview with Triple M's The Rush Hour With Leisel Jones, Liam & Dobbo on Tuesday. He explained that he and Hamish copped the ban from the International Olympic Committee after an incident during the 2012 London games. “Hamish and I were given the honour of speaking to the (Australian) Olympians before it started,” Andy began. “There’s a lot of applications and security you have to fill out to get into the Olympic village … and someone who filled out the forms put my birth date as that day’s date," he continued. Despite that fact that it was clearly an admin error, the authorities refused entry to the duo on the day of the speech. Funnily enough, a quick-thinking Aussie came to the rescue and managed to sneak him in. “I won’t name who, but someone on the team said, ‘Hey, I can bring an outfit out. You look a little bit like one of the high jumpers,’” Andy recalled. “Suddenly I went through on someone else’s (pass) and we snuck in, which was obviously a huge breach of security at a time when they were trying to prove that security was tight.” Hamish and Andy delivered their speech and mingled with all the athletes, but their little lie was called out 90 minutes later, when the security team realised they'd been tricked. “They dragged us and put us in separate rooms and there was a lot of interrogation,” Andy said. “We were … just tight-lipped, and then the head of security came in.” In another stroke of luck, the head of security turned out to be an Aussie, who recognised the duo. “He went, ‘Hamish and Andy, what are you guys doing here?’ We explained, and he was more understanding,” the comedian said. However, because of their actions, the Australian Olympic team was also punished, with some of their visitor passes revoked. “That’s why I wasn’t really proud of what happened,” Andy said. “I hate the fact that some people missed out.” The IOC also made it clear to the duo that they weren't welcome back to the village. “We had to agree to be banned for life,” Andy recalled to the amusement of the Triple M hosts. Liam Flanagan jokingly suggested to Andy: “I think the campaign needs to start here. We need the ban lifted for Brisbane 2032!” To which he replied: “or, (we could try) another sneak in … let’s double down!” Images: Instagram

Travel Trouble

Kyle slaps comedy legends with lifetime ban for "twisted" Trump joke

US comedy-rock duo Tenacious D have found themselves at the centre of a media maelstrom during their current Australian tour. The reason? A blink-and-you'll-miss-it moment during which guitarist Kyle Gass expressed that his birthday wish at their Sydney show was: “Don’t miss Trump next time.” The comment quickly sent shockwaves through the media landscape, and has even managed to ruffle the feathers of the famously unshockable Kyle Sandilands. It all started innocently enough at Sydney’s ICC Theatre. As the band celebrated Kyle Gass' 64th birthday, Tenacious D frontman and star of the big and small screen Jack Black paused the show for the ceremonial blowing out of candles. What better time for Gass to wish for world peace, or perhaps a new guitar? But no: “Don’t miss Trump next time,” he quipped, referring to the failed assassination attempt that very morning on the former US President. As expected, the moment was captured by at least one concertgoer and shared on TikTok, where the comment section swiftly became a battlefield. “As a Tenacious D fan, no. Just no,” lamented one disappointed follower. “Hmm … the left condoning gun violence. Hypocrisy at its finest. Keep showing us your colours,” declared another. However, not everyone was scandalised. “My respect for Tenacious D,” reads the top comment, with another fan chiming in, “Aaand I like them even more.” But the real kicker came when Sandilands, on the Kyle & Jackie O show, took to the airwaves to express his utter dismay. “Someone’s promoting the assassination of another human being? Seriously?” he said. “That’s some serious, twisted s**t. And whoever that is, is banned for life.” Sandilands was especially flabbergasted to learn the comment came from Tenacious D. “See, those two seem like normal people, not unhinged lunatics,” he mused. Images: KIIS FM | TikTok

Music

Grandma banned from babysitting after ignoring daughter's simple request

A new mum has banned her own mother from babysitting duties, after she blatantly refused to follow a few basic safety instructions. The young mum took to Reddit to share her plight, after moving back home so she could save up to buy a house, which at the time her mum "very enthusiastically agreed to". But, after a few months of living together again, the 23-year-old mum has had more things added onto her plate, as she's constantly worried about her own mum not following her instructions when it comes to her son, who was born in September. She said that her mum has been "constantly checking to see if he has teeth" or pushing them to "stop feeding him milk", or even trying to "give him really complicated food" like candy yams. And whenever she expresses her concerns, her mum nonchalantly responds with: "I did with you and you survived". It reached a peak when her mother gave her baby boy some water, which according to The World Health Organisation, children under six months should not be drinking anything else other than breast milk or formula. This is because babies stomachs are very small and their kidneys are still developing, so they are unable to process water in the same way adults do, plus it puts them at risk of water intoxication and nutrition loss. The grandmother blatantly ignored her daughter's request and gave her grandson water anyways responding with, "See, he's fine. He isn't dead." That was the young mum's breaking point and she immediately took her baby away. "She will no longer be watching the baby alone since she is constantly overstepping my boundaries and doing everything I ask her to not do," she wrote. But she said that things are complicated since they're living together and now her mother isn't speaking to her because she made her "feel like a bad parent and grandparent." The young mum questioned whether she was the bad guy in this scenario, but other Reddit users were quick to defend her for setting her boundaries. "One would hope for a *little* bit more for their kid than "not dead"," one wrote. "This is an incredibly low standard for her to be proud of maintaining", another added. Image: Getty

Family & Pets

Bride sparks feud for banning her niece from her big day

A bride-to-be has sparked a feud for deciding to ban her sister’s “loud and distracting” toddler from her wedding ceremony, with the bride asking social media users for advice. The bride was only weeks away from her intimate destination wedding, which included a guest list of only a few friends and close family. After being met with a difficult decision, the bride took to Reddit to share how a massive family feud had erupted in the weeks before the big day. “My sister is bringing her one-year-old toddler. The child is more than welcome — she’s part of the family and we want her there as part of the day,” she began. “However, as she’s still very young (and very loud at times), I’ve asked that somebody takes her out during the ceremony if she’s being distracting, shouting and babbling loudly.” “I know that this will probably happen as she’s constantly chatting loudly and is never quiet.” “But it’s only for half an hour and she can be as loud as she likes for the rest of the day.” “I just want everybody to be able to focus on the ceremony and I don’t want the distraction.” The bride said she was worried about sounding selfish, but then admitted that she was allowed to be selfish on her big day, and wanted all eyes on her and the groom. “We want everyone to be able to enjoy them and, to be honest, we want the guests’ attention focused on us,” she said. However, after the bride told her sister of the plans, things didn’t go down well. “My sister has told me I’m being an a****** for ‘excluding’ my niece from the ceremony and therefore by default ‘excluding’ my brother-in-law who will be the one to take her out,” the bride said. “She says that I’m asking him and the one-year-old to go all that way just for the evening meal as they will miss the ceremony and that the toddler will most likely miss that too as it will be after bedtime.” “I’ve told her that there’s a whole afternoon of relaxing things going on — photos, cake, a little walk outside and late lunch that they will be part of but apparently she’s still really annoyed with me.” The bride says her sister is now “threatening” to attend the wedding alone, leaving her partner and their daughter at home. “We’ve called her bluff and said if that’s what she wants to do then we understand,” she said. “To be honest, she’s p***ing us off so much that we’d be fine with all three of them not coming at this point.” “I don’t think that I’m asking anything unreasonable.” “All I want is a peaceful, relaxed ceremony where we can all focus on what’s going on without a toddler babbling away. “Also, to be honest, even if this WAS an unreasonable ask, surely as it’s my wedding day then it’s up to me? Isn’t it the one day of my life when I can do literally anything I want?” The post was quickly met with hundreds of comments, with most people flocking to the bride’s defence. One person wrote, “This is basic event etiquette, but it seems like sis cannot be relied on to follow basic etiquette - or even asked to do so without herself acting like a toddler.” Another suggested: “Removing a disruptive baby from a formal event would be normal etiquette, but if you specifically had to ask in advance, I’ll guess she’s got a history of not doing so.” “Your wedding, your rules. You could have gone completely child-free, all you asked was for the common courtesy of taking her outside if she got noisy.” Image credits: Shutterstock

Family & Pets

Mother bans in-laws from seeing her baby after they go against her wishes

A woman has banned her in-laws from seeing her newborn daughter after they “betrayed her trust” and directly went against her wishes. The new mum shared the story to Reddit, as she explained why she was cutting contact with her husband’s parents after they pierced her child’s ears without their knowledge or consent. “My husband is from a culture where it's not uncommon to pierce baby girls' ears and his mother started pestering me about getting my daughter's ears pierced a few days after she was born,” the 32-year-old mum began. “I made it clear that I would not be doing that, and that I'd be waiting until she's old enough to ask for it herself. We live in my country where piercing a baby's ears isn't common at all.” The new mum's world soon came crashing down after the baby spent a weekend with her grandparents, before she went back to her parents red in the face and screaming. “My mother-in-law was looking after her over the weekend and decided to pierce her ears without my knowledge or consent.” “When I saw this I threw a fit. My baby was crying in pain, and I actually took her to the doctor to get their advice on whether or not to take them out.” The doctor advised the parent to take the earrings out as they were irritating the baby, but the issue didn’t end there. “I decided at that moment that my mother-in-law and everyone else on that side of the family (except for my sister-in-law, who's on my side about this) is going to have no alone contact with my daughter ever again - or at least until she's a teenager.” “My worry is that she'll do the same thing again, and to be frank, she's lost my trust entirely. I told her that if she had a problem with that, I'd report what she did to the police.” The husband of the baby girl reluctantly sided with his wife over the issue, despite saying it wasn’t a big deal and suggesting everyone move on from the incident. The story prompted a mixed response online, with some people saying the woman was overreacting and should work towards rebuilding trust with her in-laws. Others, however, had the opposite opinion, with one person saying, “Forget rebuilding trust, I'd be having them charged with assault.” Another person said, “They mutilated a child and they knew it was against the parents wishes. These people have serious problems. Not that I'd press charges, but getting holes poked in someone else's kid is a huge thing.” Image credits: Getty Images

Family & Pets

South Australian Government's sprinkles ban sparks outrage

New guidelines for school canteens in South Australia have sparked outrage for "taking all the enjoyment away from children". Sprinkles of any kind, including 100s and 1000s - which are an essential ingredient for the iconic fairy bread - have been categorised as “red 2", meaning that they “should not be promoted or encouraged in schools on any occasion”. The ban comes after processed meats including ham would be limited at canteens in Western Australia, with similar restrictions now in place for South Australian canteens. Processed meats fall into the “red 1” or “amber” categories in South Australia, which means that products featuring them would be limited depending on nutritional criteria. These restrictions mean that children will no longer be able to regularly enjoy Australian staples like ham and cheese toasties and fairy bread at school. “Why are they taking all the enjoyment away from children?” one person told 7News. Dieticians have also questioned the decision, saying that it might only cause further problems in the future. “All your brain wants to do is eat that food, and eventually, you can restrict it for a little bit, until you get to that point where you just give in, you want to eat it, and then you binge,” dietitian Mattea Palombo said. Another expert suggested changing the foods we associate with good times. “Celebration foods aren’t so much about the foods that we have at the time of the celebration, but the friends and family we have around at the time of celebrating,” dietitian Dr Evangeline Mantzioris said. “So I think we probably need to balance it out a bit, so healthy foods are available at those celebrations.” Although the changes impact canteens, parents are still free to pack whatever they want in their kids' lunchboxes. Images: Getty

Food & Wine

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

"Unfair" Australia Day ban sparks outrage

Aussie locals call for tourist ban on popular island

Australia passes world-first social media ban for children under-16

"Just words on a piece of paper": Olympian's blunt response to lifetime ban

Olympian slapped with lifetime ban after defection

"We're giving them weapons": Charlotte O'Brien's parents call for social media ban

Fitness influencer gets lifetime ban from NYC marathon for filming content

Why Sam Newman could be banned from the MCG

Airline bans couple after racist row over reclined seat

"Enough is enough": Pauline Hanson calls for ban on Welcome to Country

“Enough is enough”: Albanese to introduce social media ban for children

Lollipop man slapped with ban over "innocent" gesture

Woman banned for life from airline for bizarre reason

Huge names on board to overturn Hamish and Andy’s Olympic Village ban

Hilarious reason why Hamish and Andy are "banned for life" from Olympic village

Kyle slaps comedy legends with lifetime ban for "twisted" Trump joke

Grandma banned from babysitting after ignoring daughter's simple request

Bride sparks feud for banning her niece from her big day

Mother bans in-laws from seeing her baby after they go against her wishes

South Australian Government's sprinkles ban sparks outrage

Our Partners