From Fenway Franks to Boston Baked Beans, Massachusetts certainly has its share of iconic regional foods. I’ve lived in Massachusetts for more than half of my life and spent most of my earlier years in neighboring New Hampshire, and by now, I consider myself to be a Bay Stater. Over the years, I’ve sampled many of Massachusett’s iconic foods, but have somehow never gotten around to trying the legendary Boston Cream Pie.
I’m not sure if it’s because I don’t really enjoy cream-filled pastries or if I just prefer other desserts like cookies and cake, but I have to admit that I’ve never really had the urge to order a Boston Cream Pie or Boston Cream Donut.
However, I do recognize that many people enjoy this popular sweet treat made up of vanilla cake, creamy vanilla pastry, and chocolate ganache.
Local lore says that the Boston Cream Pie was invented at the Parker House Hotel (now the Boston Omni Parker House) back in 1856. The chef credited with creating this masterpiece was named Chef Sanzian (sometimes written as Chef Anezin).
Advertisement
There is a lot of debate about whether this treat is actually a pie or a cake. If you have never ordered a Boston Cream Pie before, you may be surprised at what arrives at your table. It turns out that cakes were once baked in pie tins, giving the Boston Cream Pie its interesting (and often confusing) name.
Like many Boston legends, the Boston Cream Pie has gone by several aliases over the years, including American Pudding Pie and Chocolate Cream Pie. It may have also been called American Pudding Cake Pie at one point.
No matter if you consider it a cake or a pie, there is no disputing the popularity of this iconic dessert. It is not only a favorite with the tourists, but also with local Bostonians. To this day, the Boston Cream Pie continues to be a best-seller at the Parker House, where they even serve up in martini form!
And if that alone doesn’t speak volumes about the pie’s popularity, this fun fact sure does: in 1996, state officials declared the Boston Cream Pie the “Official Massachusetts State Dessert.”
I guess this many people can’t be wrong. I may have to try one and decide for myself!
Do you love Boston Cream Pie? You can order the original Boston Cream Pie at the Parker House or try one at these other local restaurants.
Are there other iconic foods that locals rave about but you have yet to try? Check out our list of 14 Iconic Foods In Massachusetts That Will Have Your Mouth Watering and see how many you have eaten.
If you consider yourself a proud Bay Stater and want to show off your Massachusetts pride, these fantastic products from Wear Your Roots will be right up your alley! Use our special code Massachusetts10 to get an exclusive discount on your purchase!
OnlyInYourState may earn compensation through affiliate links in this article. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Massachusetts will no longer require prospective foster parents to affirm gender ideology in order to qualify for fostering children, with the move coming after a federal lawsuit from a religious-liberty group.
Alliance Defending Freedom said Dec. 17 that the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families “will no longer exclude Christian and other religious families from foster care” because of their “commonly held beliefs that boys are boys and girls are girls.”
The legal group announced in September that it had filed a lawsuit in U.S. district court over the state policy, which required prospective parents to agree to affirm a child’s “sexual orientation and gender identity” before being permitted to foster.
Attorney Johannes Widmalm-Delphonse said at the time that the state’s foster system was “in crisis” with more than 1,400 children awaiting placement in foster homes.
Advertisement
Yet the state was “putting its ideological agenda ahead of the needs of these suffering kids,” Widmalm-Delphonse said.
The suit had been filed on behalf of two Massachusetts families who had been licensed to serve as foster parents in the state. They had provided homes for nearly three dozen foster children between them and were “in good standing” at the time of the policy change.
Yet the state policy required them to “promise to use a child’s chosen pronouns, verbally affirm a child’s gender identity contrary to biological sex, and even encourage a child to medically transition, forcing these families to speak against their core religious beliefs,” the lawsuit said.
With its policy change, Massachusetts will instead require foster parents to affirm a child’s “individual identity and needs,” with the LGBT-related language having been removed from the state code.
The amended language comes after President Donald Trump signed an executive order last month that aims to improve the nation’s foster care system by modernizing the current child welfare system, developing partnerships with private sector organizations, and prioritizing the participation of those with sincerely held religious beliefs.
Advertisement
Families previously excluded by the state rule are “eager to reapply for their licenses,” Widmalm-Delphonse said on Dec. 17.
The lawyer commended Massachusetts for taking a “step in the right direction,” though he said the legal group will continue its efforts until it is “positive that Massachusetts is committed to respecting religious persons and ideological diversity among foster parents.”
Other authorities have made efforts in recent years to exclude parents from state child care programs on the basis of gender ideology.
In July a federal appeals court ruled in a 2-1 decision that Oregon likely violated a Christian mother’s First Amendment rights by demanding that she embrace gender ideology and homosexuality in order to adopt children.
In April, meanwhile, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed legislation that would have prohibited the government from requiring parents to affirm support for gender ideology and homosexuality if they want to qualify to adopt or foster children.
Advertisement
In contrast, Arkansas in April enacted a law to prevent adoptive agencies and foster care providers from discriminating against potential parents on account of their religious beliefs.
The Arkansas law specifically prohibits the government from discriminating against parents over their refusal to accept “any government policy regarding sexual orientation or gender identity that conflicts with the person’s sincerely held religious beliefs.”
A costly sportsbook screwup left DraftKings on the hook for nearly $1 million after Massachusetts regulators ordered the payouts tied to a botched MLB parlay scheme.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted 5-0 on Thursday to reject DraftKings’ bid to void $934,137 in payouts stemming from a series of correlated parlays placed during MLB’s 2025 American League Championship Series, according to Bookies.com.
A Massachusetts customer wagered $12,950 total across 27 multi-leg parlays on Toronto Blue Jays player Nathan Lukes, exploiting an internal DraftKings configuration error that allowed the bettor to stack multiple versions of the same bet into one wager.
DraftKings sought to void a payout of nearly $1 million to a bettor who placed 27 multi-leg parlay wagers that were successful. Tada Images – stock.adobe.com
DraftKings told regulators the bets should never have been accepted and argued the patron acted unethically by taking advantage of an obvious error.
Advertisement
Commissioners flatly rejected that argument.
The wagers were tied to DraftKings’ “Player to Record X+ Hits in Series” market during the seven-game ALCS between Toronto and Seattle.
Because of a misclassification inside DraftKings’ trading tools, Lukes was incorrectly labeled a “non-participant” rather than an active player.
That designation disabled safeguards designed to block bettors from parlaying correlated outcomes from the same market.
As a result, the bettor was able to combine multiple Lukes hit thresholds — including 5+, 6+, 7+ and 8+ hits — into single parlays, functionally creating an inflated wager on Lukes recording eight or more hits at dramatically enhanced odds.
Advertisement
A Massachusetts customer wagered $12,950 total across 27 multi-leg parlays on Toronto Blue Jays player Nathan Lukes. AP
The bettor also added unrelated, high-probability legs, including NFL moneyline bets, to further juice payouts.
Lukes ultimately appeared in all seven games and finished the series with nine hits, clearing every threshold.
Of the 27 parlays placed, 24 hit cleanly. Only three lost due to unrelated college football legs involving Clemson, Florida State and Miami.
During a heated exchange at Thursday’s commission meeting, DraftKings executive Paul Harrington accused the patron of fraud and unethical conduct.
DraftKings told regulators the bets should never have been accepted and argued the patron acted unethically by taking advantage of an obvious error.
Commissioners bristled. One of them, Eileen O’Brien, blasted DraftKings for casting aspersions on the bettor without evidence and said the situation did not meet the standard of an “obvious error.”
Advertisement
“An obvious error is a legal and factual impossibility,” O’Brien said. “This is an advantage that the patron took.”
She added that DraftKings’ internal failures — not the bettor’s conduct — created the situation.
“We need to seriously consider giving voice to the consumer and getting their half the story,” O’Brien said. “The compulsion to pay will in fact encourage compliance.”
Because of a misclassification inside DraftKings’ trading tools, Lukes was incorrectly labeled a “non-participant” rather than an active player. Getty Images
Other commissioners echoed that view, emphasizing that it is the operator’s responsibility to ensure the integrity of its markets.
The commission noted that DraftKings acknowledged the root cause was internal — a configuration failure within its own trading tools — and not the result of a third-party odds provider or external data feed.
Advertisement
Upon discovering the error, DraftKings pulled the affected markets, left the wagers unsettled pending regulatory guidance and implemented corrective fixes.
The company said no other Massachusetts customers were impacted, though the same issue appeared in two other jurisdictions.
SPRINGFIELD — With just days left before the Dec. 23 deadline, state and local leaders are urging uninsured residents to enroll in health coverage through the Massachusetts Health Connector to ensure they’re protected in the new year. The cutoff applies to anyone who wants coverage starting Jan. 1.
The Health Connector — the state’s official health insurance marketplace — is the only place residents can access financial assistance and avoid misleading “junk” policies that often appear in online searches, according to a statement from the agency.
Officials say the enrollment period is especially critical for people without job-based insurance, gig workers, newcomers to the state and anyone seeking affordable, comprehensive health plans.
At a press conference Wednesday at Caring Health Center’s Tania M. Barber Learning Institute in Springfield, health leaders emphasized that most people who sign up through the Connector qualify for help paying premiums through its ConnectorCare program.
Advertisement
Audrey Morse Gasteier, executive director of the Massachusetts Health Connector, said the state has spent nearly two decades committed to ensuring access to health care and offering the most affordable coverage possible for everyone.
”And despite the federal challenges, we continue to do everything we can to offer coverage to everyone who needs it. Now is the time for people who don’t have coverage to come in, apply, and find out what kind of plan for which they qualify,” she said.
Open enrollment also gives current members a chance to review their coverage, compare options and make changes.
Recent changes in federal policy have caused shifts in coverage and higher premiums for many Massachusetts residents, creating uncertainty and concern, said Cristina Huebner Torres, chief executive vice president and strategy and research officer at Caring Health Center.
“During times like these, trusted, local support becomes even more essential, and our Navigators have been on the very front lines, helping residents understand their options, maintain coverage, and navigate a complex and evolving system,” Huebner Torres said.
