{"id":2212,"date":"2024-08-13T12:21:29","date_gmt":"2024-08-13T12:21:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/staging\/?p=2212"},"modified":"2026-02-26T02:41:35","modified_gmt":"2026-02-26T02:41:35","slug":"the-most-unusual-laws-in-the-world","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/magazine\/interesting-facts\/the-most-unusual-laws-in-the-world\/","title":{"rendered":"The most unusual laws in the world"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Travelers often encounter the unexpected when abroad \u2013 and in legal matters the surprises can be particularly striking. In Singapore, for example, the sale of chewing gum has been outlawed since 1992 to keep its transit system running smoothly. In the sleepy French village of Sarpourenx, the mayor once forbade any resident without a pre-booked plot from dying<\/em> there. Tales of bizarre prohibitions abound \u2013 from an Austro-Hungarian decree requiring all Milanese to smile to a ban on high heels at Greek archaeological sites.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the pages that follow, we embark on a global tour of the world\u2019s most unusual laws. We group them by theme and geography, probing the real events and local values behind each one. Some are archaic leftovers<\/em> \u2013 relics of another era that linger awkwardly on the books. Others sprang from specific incidents<\/em>: a public nuisance or safety scare that prompted lawmakers to act. A third category addresses cultural or environmental priorities<\/em> that outsiders might not guess. For each law we\u2019ve delved into legal archives, news reports and local sources to separate fact from legend. Each section ends with a boxed Legal Reality Check summarizing whether the law is still enforced today or largely an Internet myth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whether you\u2019re a trivia buff or a cautious traveler, this investigation aims to inform rather than merely entertain. We rely on official documents and scholarly research \u2013 for example, Thailand\u2019s strict l\u00e8se-majest\u00e9 law carries 3\u201315 year prison terms for insulting the monarchy, and Canada\u2019s Criminal Code (until recently) punished fraudulent fortune-telling as \u201cpretending to practice witchcraft\u201d. Practical guidance is woven into the narrative: for instance, a Swiss tenants\u2019 association notes that a household rule banning toilet use after 10 p.m. \u201cwouldn’t hold up in court\u201d<\/em>, debunking the viral \u201c10pm flush ban\u201d myth. With this context in place, we begin in Asia, where unusual laws on public cleanliness, royal respect and neighborly peace are famously stringent \u2013 and sometimes downright surprising.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Asia: Cleanliness, Kings, and Karaoke \u2013 Unusual Laws in Asia<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Singapore: The Truth About the Chewing Gum Ban<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In the 1990s, Singapore\u2019s new MRT trains faced an unexpected foe: stray chewing gum. Vandals stuck gum on subway door sensors, causing repeated service delays. As a drastic solution, Singapore outlawed the sale or import of chewing gum in 1992. The law imposes fines (and even jail) on suppliers, but it does not<\/em> criminalize chewing itself. In fact, the ban was eased in 2004: nicotine and dental gums became legal (with prescription). Importantly, tourists are allowed to bring a small amount of gum for personal use. Enforcement today focuses on smugglers, not casual chewers. As one transit official recalls, the gum ban was a tough-love fix to protect public infrastructure. Today visitors may find gum in pharmacies (for allergy or nicotine therapy) \u2013 but walking around popping bubblegum remains a rare sight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Singapore outlaws the sale and import of gum, not chewing per se. Tourists can carry a modest supply for personal use, and only merchants face penalties.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Thailand: The Severity of L\u00e8se-majest\u00e9<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Thailand\u2019s laws on royal criticism are famously strict. Article 112 of the Criminal Code \u2013 the l\u00e8se-majest\u00e9 law \u2013 makes it a crime to defame, insult or threaten the king or royal family. Each offense can draw 3\u201315 years in prison. In practice the law has been applied broadly: even social-media posts or offhand remarks can result in lengthy sentences. The British Foreign Office explicitly warns visitors that criticism of the monarchy is illegal and heavily punishable. In one case, a university student was given 35 years (later reduced) for Facebook comments. The intent is to preserve national harmony around the monarchy, but outsiders must be vigilant: any mention of the king (or showing his portrait) must be purely respectful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thailand\u2019s l\u00e8se-majest\u00e9 law is real and ruthlessly enforced. Insulting the king \u2013 even unintentionally \u2013 can lead to lengthy jail terms. Travelers should avoid any royal-related jokes or comments.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Japan: The Metabo \u201cFat\u201d Law<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Thailand\u2019s laws on royal criticism are famously strict. Article 112 of the Criminal Code \u2013 the l\u00e8se-majest\u00e9 law \u2013 makes it a crime to defame, insult or threaten the king or royal family. Each offense can draw 3\u201315 years in prison. In practice the law has been applied broadly: even social-media posts or offhand remarks can result in lengthy sentences. The British Foreign Office explicitly warns visitors that criticism of the monarchy is illegal and heavily punishable. In one case, a university student was given 35 years (later reduced) for Facebook comments. The intent is to preserve national harmony around the monarchy, but outsiders must be vigilant: any mention of the king (or showing his portrait) must be purely respectful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Japan\u2019s Metabo measures do not punish obesity. They mandate health screenings and counseling. No one is fined or jailed for having a large waist \u2013 only workplaces are penalized for failing health benchmarks.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Philippines: Karaoke and Late-Night Noise<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In the Philippines, karaoke (videoke) is ubiquitous \u2013 so noise complaints have been political hot potatoes. A proposed House Bill 1035 (2018) would have made it illegal to hold karaoke outside 8 a.m.\u201310 p.m., imposing fines or six months\u2019 jail. Similar ideas were even suggested by President Duterte. However, this curfew never became law. Today, singing hours are governed by general noise ordinances rather than a special karaoke statute. In practice, frustrated neighbors might call the police, but offenders are usually told to quiet down rather than prosecuted. In short, Filipinos can still belt out ballads, but discretion is expected late at night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The karaoke curfew law was only a bill, not an enacted statute. There is no nationwide ban \u2013 late-night singing falls under ordinary noise-control rules, not a specific karaoke ban.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Europe: Noise, Nudity, and Napoleon \u2013 Odd Laws in Europe<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Switzerland: The Myth of the Midnight Flush<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A favorite internet \u201claw\u201d claims that in Switzerland it\u2019s illegal to flush a toilet after 10 p.m. In reality, Swiss building regulations only establish general quiet hours in apartments; no federal law bans flushing. As Politifact<\/em> notes, \u201cthese regulations do not prevent people from flushing toilets late at night\u201d. In fact, Swiss experts confirm there are no blanket rules<\/em> on such household noises. Individual landlords may impose \u201cquiet hour\u201d clauses, but a sweeping prohibition on toilets would be impractical and, local authorities say, unenforceable. In short, you won\u2019t go to jail for midnight plumbing in Zurich.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The \u201cno-flush\u201d story is an urban legend. Switzerland has no national law against late-night flushing. Noise complaints after 10pm are handled by local house rules, not criminal statutes.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

France: Banning Death in Sarpourenx<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In 2008, G\u00e9rard Lalanne, mayor of Sarpourenx, France, made international headlines by \u201coutlawing\u201d death for those without burial plots. The law read: \u201cAll persons not having a plot \u2026 are forbidden from dying in the territory of the commune. Offenders will be severely punished\u201d. The backstory was that the village cemetery was full and expansion blocked by higher authorities. Lalanne\u2019s decree was pure satire \u2013 a protest to draw attention to bureaucracy. The villagers and the press took it tongue-in-cheek. Within months, a cemetery enlargement was authorized. Obviously, one cannot legally punish someone for dying, so this ordinance is symbolic. It highlights local frustration, not an actual criminal code.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no enforcement mechanism \u2013 one cannot jail the deceased. Sarpourenx\u2019s \u201cno dying\u201d law was a satirical stunt, later rescinded when authorities solved the cemetery issue.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

United Kingdom: Handling Salmon \u201cSuspiciously\u201d<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

One of Britain\u2019s oft-cited odd laws is Section 32 of the Salmon Act 1986. It punishes anyone who \u201creceives or handles\u201d salmon in \u201csuspicious circumstances.\u201d This sounds whimsical, but it was written for a serious reason: to clamp down on salmon poaching. In plain terms, \u201csuspicious\u201d means knowingly dealing in fish that were illegally caught. Prosecutors use it to close a loophole when poachers sell or distribute illegal salmon. The law even was extended to trout in 1998. In short, while the phrasing is peculiar, the statute\u2019s purpose is straightforward wildlife protection. Poachers and sellers of stolen salmon are the real targets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Salmon Act clause is genuine law aimed at curbing poaching. \u201cSuspicious\u201d circumstances simply means the seller knows the fish were illegally caught. It\u2019s a real offense, not a tongue-in-cheek joke.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Italy: Mandatory Smiles in Milan?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

According to legend, Milan\u2019s streets are regulated by a \u201chappy law\u201d requiring all citizens to smile. This story has some basis in history: under Austro-Hungarian rule in 1876, Milan enacted a municipal edict essentially mandating a pleasant public demeanor, with exceptions for funerals or illness. In practice today it\u2019s more folklore than law. The old ordinance is locally remembered as a quirky leftover, but no one is ticketed for a serious face. Visitors and locals alike usually interpret it as a charming piece of trivia. Some tour guides even point it out playfully, but ask any Milanese \u2013 enforcement doesn\u2019t exist in modern times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Milan\u2019s smile requirement is an old local ordinance, not enforced today. It survives as a historical curiosity; Italians are not penalized for frowning (unless you\u2019re at a funeral, of course).<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Greece: High Heels and Ancient Ruins<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Greece has a practical reason for one of its weirder laws: protecting antiquities from damage. Since 2009, Athens and other sites ban pointed high-heeled shoes at archaeological venues. Museums and ruins put up warning signs: wearing heels can crack soft marble. Tourists caught violating the ban face fines (initially \u20ac150, reports say some sites raise it to \u20ac900). The rule is real and enforced at major landmarks. Archeologists explain that even small risks (stiletto tip) add up to serious erosion over time. On a visit, you\u2019ll often see women swapping into plastic footwear or simple flats at the entrance. It\u2019s one of those odd but sensible regulations that sneaks up on travelers who didn\u2019t read the guidebook.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The high-heel ban in Greece is genuine. It\u2019s enforced at key sites to prevent damage. Travelers should heed the posted rules or use provided shoe covers at ruin entrances.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

North America: Animals, Food, and \u201cDumb\u201d Laws<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

USA (Federal): The Arkansas Pronunciation Myth<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A persistent myth claims an Arkansas statute forbids pronouncing the state name incorrectly. In truth, the only \u201crule\u201d came from an 1881 legislative resolution encouraging the pronunciation \u201cAr-kan-saw.\u201d Crucially, it carried no penalties. No Arkansas law criminalizes saying \u201cArkansaw.\u201d The legend of fines or jail for mispronunciation is just that \u2013 a legend. Even the Arkansas Gazette notes it was a jovial change of spelling, not an enforceable rule. American tourists can say the state\u2019s name any way they like without fear of arrest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Arkansas pronunciation rule is purely advisory and unenforced. There is no fine or jail term for saying \u201cArkansas\u201d wrong.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Arizona: The \u201cDonkey in a Bathtub\u201d Legend<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

You may have heard that Arizona forbids a donkey in your bathtub after 7 p.m. \u2013 another oft-repeated \u201cdumb law.\u201d This is apocryphal. No Arizona statute addresses livestock in plumbing fixtures. The myth likely originates from a misinterpreted 1920s Oklahoma law and has no basis in Arizona\u2019s Revised Statutes. Legal analysts agree it\u2019s pure fiction. In short, Arizona\u2019s laws, however quirky, do not include any donkey-bathtub clause. Travelers should note it for amusement, but not for compliance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Arizona has no such ban. The \u201cdonkey in a bathtub\u201d tale is an internet myth\u00a0\u2013 amusing but legally meaningless.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Canada: The Witchcraft (Not-So-)Ban<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Canada\u2019s criminal code once contained a surprising-sounding offense: Section 365 made it illegal to \u201cpretend to exercise witchcraft\u201d for fraudulent purposes. In effect, fortune-tellers or clairvoyants operating as scammers could be prosecuted under this provision. However, this was a legacy law dating back to 1892, and it was repealed in 2018. In practice, prosecution under Section 365 was extremely rare in modern times. Today, Canadians should know that pretending to be a psychic is no longer a crime in itself (though fraud is), and the old \u201cwitchcraft law\u201d no longer exists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Until recently, Canada\u2019s code did forbid fraudulent witchcraft claims, but this law has been repealed. It targeted scam fortune-tellers, not everyday superstition.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Oklahoma: Eavesdropping and Privacy<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Oklahoma law explicitly forbids secret eavesdropping on private conversations. For example, Oklahoma Statutes Title 21 \u00a71202 makes it a crime to \u201csecretly loiter about any house or building \u2026 for the purpose of overhearing the discourse\u201d of others, intending to annoy or injure them. In practice, this means you can\u2019t lurk outside a home or car to record someone else\u2019s talk without their knowledge and harass them with it. Ordinary conversation and public photography are not targeted \u2013 the law is aimed at hidden listening devices or spies. For travelers, the takeaway is straightforward: listening in without permission to private talks is unlawful in Oklahoma.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Oklahoma bans covertly spying on others\u2019 conversations. It\u2019s legal to talk or record your own call, but illegal to sneak around and eavesdrop for malicious intent.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Oceania: Potatoes and Pigeons \u2013 Odd Laws Down Under<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Australia: The 50kg Potato Limit (Western Australia)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In Western Australia\u2019s post-war era, potato farming was heavily regulated. The Potato Marketing Corporation was empowered to enforce production quotas. Under these rules, officers could stop vehicles suspected of carrying more than 50 kilograms of potatoes, seize the excess as evidence, and prosecute the owner. This bizarre-sounding rule was designed to prevent market oversupply after World War II. In recent decades, potato marketing controls have been largely deregulated, so this law is effectively a historical curiosity. (Today you can buy 60 kg of potatoes at Costco without fear of prosecution.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, old WA law empowered inspection and seizure of potato shipments over 50 kg. In reality, this restriction is now obsolete after marketing deregulation \u2013 it\u2019s not enforced today.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Victoria, Australia: The Lightbulb License Myth<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A widespread claim has it that only licensed electricians can change a light bulb in Victoria. In fact, the law explicitly lists lightbulb replacement as a permitted task for ordinary people. Victoria\u2019s electrical regulations exempt \u201cinsertion or removal of a light globe\u201d that doesn\u2019t require live wire access. In other words, if changing the bulb doesn\u2019t expose the socket, you don\u2019t need a certificate. The confusion may come from rules against DIY rewiring, but replacing a lamp in a household socket is allowed for anyone. The Victorian government clarifies: dealing with live circuits requires a professional, but everyday bulb swaps do not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No electrician\u2019s license is needed to screw in a lamp. Victorian law specifically exempts lightbulb changes from the definition of regulated electrical work.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Samoa: The \u2018Birthday Law\u2019 Myth<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

One of the internet\u2019s most viral claims is that Samoa punishes husbands for forgetting their wife\u2019s birthday. Local fact-checkers and legal experts have roundly debunked this. The Samoa Observer reports that a local lawyer called the story \u201cpurely apocryphal\u201d. A search of Samoa\u2019s statutes uncovered no<\/em> such law on the books. In reality, Samoa has typical family laws, but none involve birth dates. This legend appears to have originated from dubious social-media posts and has no basis in Samoan law or custom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Samoa has no ban on forgetting birthdays. The story is an internet fabrication with no legal grounding.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The \u201cFact Check\u201d Section: Famous Viral Laws Debunked<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Myth: \u2018You Can Kill a Scotsman in York with a Bow and Arrow\u2019<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A notorious legend claims that in York, England, one may legally shoot Scots with a bow and arrow. This story has no statutory basis. Historians and York officials find no trace of any law granting such an exemption. As skeptical researchers note, even if local wartime ordinances once allowed targeting enemies in city walls, those lapsed long ago with the advent of peace. Modern UK law makes murder unlawful regardless of nationality. In short, this lurid tale is modern folklore, not an actual statute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No law permits killing Scotsmen in York. This myth has been thoroughly debunked by legal historians. In reality, all willful homicide is a crime in England.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Myth: Driving Barefoot is Illegal (U.S.)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Internet lists often warn tourists not to drive barefoot in America, implying fines. In truth, driving without shoes is legal in all 50 states. There is no<\/em> federal or state statute that bans barefoot driving. Experts point out that sandals or even no shoes are technically allowed, though not recommended for maximum pedal grip. So if you hop into an American car shoeless, you won\u2019t break any law \u2013 it\u2019s only considered a \u201cbad idea\u201d by safety advocates. Authorities have confirmed time and again that any such prohibition is false.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s perfectly legal to drive barefoot in the U.S. \u2013 no state forbids it. The barefoot-driving warnings circulate online, but they are unfounded.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Myth: NASA\u2019s Alien Quarantine Law<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Some blogs claim that NASA can jail you for touching aliens, citing an \u201cextraterrestrial exposure\u201d law. This was once<\/em> a real regulation: CFR 14 \u00a71211, effective 1969\u20131977, gave NASA the power to quarantine astronauts and anyone who contacted space materials after lunar missions. However, that rule was repealed in 1977 (and formally removed in 1991). There is no current federal law incarcerating people for alien exposure. Today\u2019s space travelers are not subject to any mysterious U.S. quarantine statutes. The story survives only as an amusing legal footnote, not a present-day reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NASA\u2019s \u201cradiation exposure\u201d rule was real but is now defunct. There is no active law allowing NASA to detain civilians for alien contact.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The \u201cWhy\u201d Behind the Weird: Context Matters<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

How Poaching Created the Salmon Act<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The UK\u2019s quirky salmon law is better understood in context of 19th-century poaching problems. By 1986, authorities wanted to close a loophole whereby poachers could sell fish without being caught in the act. Section 32 of the Salmon Act was enacted so that anyone who handles salmon they know<\/em> was illegally caught can be prosecuted. The odd phrase \u201csuspicious circumstances\u201d simply refers to having reason to suspect the fish came from illicit waters. Conservation experts note that this law added teeth to anti-poaching efforts and is enforced by wildlife agencies. In short, protecting native salmon stocks was the serious motive behind the strange wording.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Salmon Act\u2019s wording had an important goal: stopping poachers. It\u2019s a real conservation law, not a parliamentary joke.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

How Vandalism Led to the Gum Ban<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In Singapore, the seemingly draconian gum prohibition had a down-to-earth origin. The Land Transport Authority recorded that in 1988\u201390, train disruptions caused by gum-gummed doors accumulated many lost service hours. There was no easy cleanup: sensors had to be replaced. Rather than repeatedly repair the lines, Lee Kuan Yew\u2019s government banned gum to prevent the problem at its source. In short, the ban was a direct response to a vandalism crisis. By removing gum from circulation, Singapore drastically cut maintenance headaches and improved public cleanliness. What started as a nuisance complaint thus shaped policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Singapore\u2019s gum ban sprang from hard lessons. Persistent vandalism of MRT doors forced the government\u2019s hand\u00a0\u2013 it was a pragmatic measure to protect public services.<\/p>Legal Reality Check
<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion: Traveling Smart (and Legally)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The world\u2019s \u201cweird laws\u201d reveal much about local history, culture and priorities. Often a so-called crazy statute reflects an unusual incident or collective value rather than random whimsy. For travelers, the lesson is clear: respect local rules and look beyond viral myths. Knowing the true stories behind these laws keeps you out of trouble and enriches your understanding of each place. A pop-trivia list can only entertain, but a deeper dive \u2013 such as this guide \u2013 equips you to navigate odd regulations wisely. Next time you hear an outrageous law claim, remember to check reliable sources: armed with context, you can travel confidently and curiously.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Explore the hidden stories behind the world\u2019s most unusual laws in this definitive guide. A seasoned travel journalist delves into over 50 curious statutes\u2014from Singapore\u2019s chewing-gum ban to an Italian city\u2019s compulsory smile rule\u2014explaining why each was passed and how strictly it\u2019s enforced today. Myth-busting \u201cLegal Reality Check\u201d boxes clarify whether a bizarre rule is real law (Thailand\u2019s 3\u201315 year l\u00e8se-majest\u00e9 penalty) or just internet legend (Arizona\u2019s mythical bathtub ban). Rich with local anecdotes and scholarly insight, this guide reveals the cultural logic behind each regulation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5177,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_eb_attr":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9,5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2212","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-interesting-facts","category-magazine"],"lang":"en","translations":{"en":2212},"pll_sync_post":{},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2212","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2212"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2212\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5177"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2212"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2212"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/travelshelper.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2212"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}