Am I the only one that thinks that celebrity privilege is going to far these days when it impinges on the accessibility of public places for other citizens? http://www.tmz.com/2012/04/11/jennifer-lopez-rents-beach/#.T4WVotVxER8 We heard about the same kind of thing when Beyonce had her baby. Other new parents and their families that were in the hospital were limited in their access to the nursery while Beyonce was there, allegedly for security reasons. I would be ticked off if I had planned a day on a public beach, only to find out i was not allowed on the public beach because a rich celebrity had "rented" it out for their own privacy.
What's the problem??? Is it that the beach was rented out or that it was a celeb that rented. A little research shows that the City of Long Beach rents it facilities out. Just as most cities do. You could go to a ball field or park in Clayton and find it closed to you because it has been rented out. The article states they it cost her $925, that doesn't sound very privileged to me. When you consider the temps were in the 60's and the water temp is about the same. I don't' think too may people were put out.
Also, "Marine Beach" is not really a beach in the way you might be thinking (ie, it doesn't sit on the ocean). It's a stretch of waterfront along the Long Beach harbour. It's actually a park called Marine Park (the locals call it "Mother's Beach" because that's where the SAH Moms go with their tykes. No big waves, etc to wash away the little ones). My opinion: TMZ is trying to raise an ire where none should be raised. Jennifer Lopez rented the beach for the day just like anyone else can. Nothing special, move along.
Well...I'm glad to hear that then. As I said, I'd hate to plan a trip to a beach only to find it rented out by someone for their own private use.
