www.CostaRicaTicas.com

I don't understand the title of the topic UGLY AMERICANS? Have they been charged with anything. Maybe you are Anti American? SEAHAWK

_________________
DO WHAT YOU LOVE AND LOVE WHAT YOU DO

Actually, DD, I didn't realize YOU wouldn't be able to understand my ANSWER. First, I elaborate and then you apparently mocking say it was a simple question so I gave you a simple answer. Why are you busting my balls? Lets go over one last time and see if you get it.

"These guys are accused of paying this girl for sex" comes directly from the title.

"not simply propositioning her". Paying her actual cash IS a step or two beyond simply making suggestive comments or even simply just OFFERING her money for sex.

"and yet they never made it past the lobby." AND "They brought her back to the hotel and when it came time to check her in discovered they had a problem." Again the article said "Once the hotel, the girl said, there was a "personal" discussion between her and the men".

Once at hotel certainly sounds to ME like it happened SOON after arriving there rather than AFTER an hour of sex. Also like I said before, if sex had taken place what would be the relevance of any "discussion"? Why not just "After going to the hotel, she decided to go to the police"? And the description of that discussion as "personal" in quotes is also strange. If it was just the 3 of them in the room of course it was personal or private. This sounded to me like there may have been other people nearby. Take all of these with the fact that most hotels check IDs when gringos bring back young chicas and the lobby seems to me to be a very logical ASSUMPTION for where that discussion took place. Could it have happened once they got up to the room? OF COURSE AND SO WHAT!!! That particular distinction has really very little bearing on the main point I was trying to make (unless you like to nitpick), that they paid her for something and did not have sex.

My main point was nowhere in that article did it say they actually had sex with the girl, which I think IS an important distinction if you want to string these guys up. The bigger question is exactly why they didn't actually have any sex and I allowed for a number of different possibilities. You ask me to point to specific words in the article that back up my statements and I tell you that is an unreasonable request. The support for my deductions are mostly BETWEEN the lines, but IMHO those deductions are not at all unreasonable. If you want a simple answer to a simple question, then let me ask you this

WHERE IN THAT ARTICLE DID IT SPECIFICALLY SAY THEY HAD SEX WITH THE GIRL? Answer: NO WHERE. That fact by itself is very telling.

Oh and Seahawk, not to nitpick with you, but your questions are more easily answered by the title of the Inside Costa Rica article itself. ""Two Americans Detained For Paying a Minor for Sex". That seems to settle that yes they were AMERICANS and yes they have been at least DETAINED by the authorities and most likely charged with paying for sex with a minor. If the charges are true than UGLY AMERICANS is a very apt one. I raised some issues that might mitigate their guilt but most likely they're probably at least partially guilty of something. Maybe, as Circus suggested, Gringos are targeted with this type of prosecutions more than locals. But even if they're completely innocent of those charges they're at least guilty of a huge lapse in judgement that ultimately makes us ALL look bad and feeds those anti-american attitudes you're complaining about.

_________________
Pura Vida
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four
essential food groups:
alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat.
Alex Levine

und***ge is und***ge. Any implication about sex with a minor is just wrong and illegal. It doesn't matter if they actually did the deed. Importuning is the charge here in the States.

Let me be the devil.

I don't want to have sex with a minor, but if a minor has already had sex 40 times what's the big deal ethically and even criminally for having sex with a minor? A lot of rightous statements here about sex with a minor as if every single instant is evil and so hang the SOB.

If a 15 year old has had sex with 4 22 year olds - what's is the big deal if "she" decides to have sex with a 33 year old?

Okay, let's say she had sex with only 1 guy who was 16 years old and she has had sex 40 times (a real pro so she thinks). What if the next guy is 33? He isn't busting her innocents. If he isn't forcing her in any way, what is the difference in screwing the 16 year old?

Of the guys here, how many were 18 or 19 and screwing the girls in high school. I can remember being in high school, the parking lot was full of guys in cars who were 18, 19 20, 21 and 22 waiting for their girl to get out of class. These guys don't hang around if they aren't getting any sex. When I was in the military, many guys were home sick so they quickly ran home on leave to marry their girl in HIGH SCHOOL.

Instead of kicking the moral issue around, let's instead say that screwing a girl under 18 in CR is a bad thing to do because you could end up in jail for a long time. Like someone else implied, Americans are a target. There are plenty of Chicas that were knocked up when they were minors and who often reads about the Ticos going to jail?

My last trip (late August) I was at the SL talking with a few old timers (retired a long time ago) and they mentioned a guy that is currently in jail for something like 15 years for having sex with a minor (a very recent case). I've heard that some parents will attempt to extort money from Americans. They allow the sex, encourage it, know of it and then threaten to tell the police if 20K isn't paid. This story/situation is in the rumor mill.

Of course there are cases where there isn't any excuse for having sex with a minor, even if she has had sex before.

Again, there are plenty at 18 and over so I'm not interesting in the under 18 crowd. I'm just being the devil or the realist here.

my take is that one, should stay well away from commenting on something that is not open to debate,none of our business and the armchair pysch's should refrain from having an opinion on every little thing that happen's in costa rica...........

Well put Osgood,
why is this "topic" even being discussed to such extent?...

_________________

Living well is the best revenge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwUtj_YnNoY

YO Good Looking Gringos:

This thread is becoming a merry-go-round. Yea, there are some ugly gingos along with uglies from all countries. This crap hs been happening for centuries and sadly will possibly continue for a few more. Personally, I'm getting a bit tired of the term "Ugly American." If I had to pick on a specific continent as the worst in this damned practice, without hesitation, I would point to "Ugly Africans." A number of countries in Africa not only have rampant abuse of young teen females but it is a normal practice of pre-teen rape and abuse. Talk about a sad commentary on civilization and human behavior. Even more tragic is that it is considered practical and legal in some providences. You will not read about it in the mainstrean press but back during the 60's, 70's 80's a number of american and european business families hired by african companies ended up surrendering their Ch*ldren to the sexual delight of wealthy africans. This was relayed to me by very reliable sources.

Bringing up these points is not to minimize the illegal practices we are discussing in reference to Costa Rica. Since this term has been brought up it just seems like the rest of the world is quick to point to how awful this country is and it is mostly described by that term "Ugly American." Well, there are plenty of international uglies to go around. My apologies for rambling on but I felt it was proper to somewhat put this in prospective. I'll hang with the good looking americans even though I look like shit......and pitiful.

Hey lets change the name of this thread to Homely Americans, then we can talk about Paco
Sparky

_________________
Sparky
Get in line to ride the lightning!!!


Almost legally single again! Voy a Colombia otra vece!!

Osgood,
I respectfully disagree with you. We're just talking here. If you're not interested don't read it. I think you had a pretty good idea where this thread was going within the first few posts and have probably already made up your mind about the relative merit of individual poster's usual contributions. Personally, I think exploring different aspects of a situation can be very enlightening.

Part of the problem here is whether one accepts the concept of moral relativism or whether one just sees things in stark black and white. I think there ARE some sins that are worse than others. Saying that in no way means to say that those "lesser" sins are okay.

For those reasons I disagree somewhat with RW's comment "It doesn't matter if they actually did the deed." Did they know she was und***ge or should they have at least strongly suspected? Probably yes, but if they didn't that would have been a mitigating circumstance. Sure they'd still be guilty of something but not deserving of being strung up. If they didn't do the deed, why not? Did they only stop because she refused or because they couldn't get her to their room? Then that would amount to practically as bad a situation as if they had actually carried it out. But what if they had enough moral sense to stop themselves before they went too far? Wouldn't they deserve at least some reduction in their punishment for that? Lets go one step further. What if this girl was already "corrupt"? I'm not just talking about not being a virgin. What if she had dolled herself up to look older (and presented herself to them as such) and approached these guys rather than the other way around? What if she never had the intention to have sex with these guys but was merely setting them up for extortion once they had sufficiently compromised themselves and her true age was revealed? What if she had also pulled this maneveur on other gringos? Unless we restrict ourselves to girls that are obviously well beyond border age (which would not be that bad an idea), any one of us could fall prey to such a scenario. Are you saying that we all should be subject to the same penalties as true pedophiles. I'm not saying this girl definitely did any of this. Maybe she really was sweet and innocent or maybe the truth falls somewhere in between, but the possibility certainly exists.

Before anyone thinks I'm an apologist for Ch*ld molesters, I'd like to address Dwayne's comments. I understand he was just playing the devil's advocate, but here is where I see a problem with his reasoning.

"If a 15 year old has had sex with 4 22 year olds - what's is the big deal if "she" decides to have sex with a 33 year old?" If someone else has already broken a window and looted a store, does that make it right to go in and take the remaining goods? Obviously not. and make no mistake any 22 y.o. that is banging a 15y.o. is also "looting the store". There is a huge difference in maturity levels between those ages. The 15y.o. may think she's found her "first love" with mature older men but those 22 y.o. probably just see an impressionable young hottie that they can take advantage of. Or maybe she really does just like sex as much as the guys. She still probably doesn't realize the risk of pregnancy and disease from even protected sex and is probably more easily manipulated by those guys into going bare. And as statistics show she's probably in for a rude awakening when she gets knocked up and her older tico boyfriends suddenly disappear.

"Okay, let's say she had sex with only 1 guy who was 16 years old and she has had sex 40 times (a real pro so she thinks). What if the next guy is 33? He isn't busting her innocents. If he isn't forcing her in any way, what is the difference in screwing the 16 year old?" The difference is the 16 year-old is on the same maturity level of the 15 year old and doesn't know any better what he is doing and the possible consequences than she does. Also being closer in age there is greater possibility that there is more going on in their relationship than just a guy taking advantage of a young girl for sex. Busting her innocents is not the only issue either since as much or more permanent harm can be done with prolonged sexual abuse as with a single instance. And finally using terms like "he isn't forcing her in any way" or "she decides to have sex" misses the whole concept that before a certain age a person is incapable of providing informed consent.

Now lets say you don't buy any of this. Well then, fear of incarceration or entrapment are certainly valid reasons by themselves to avoid these types of encounters. Whatever it takes to keep you on the straight and narrow.

zzzzzzzzzzzz............zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........zzzzzzzzzzz

The above works for me because we all know Americans are targets all the way down to the special American restaurant menu with the higher priced labels or the same menu for everyone however Ticos get the silent 20% discount.

Not all sex-with-a-minor cases are morally wrong, however all cases are criminally wrong so watch out!

This STILL essentially happens in countries like Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos. Unfortunately, due to extreme poverty, families sell their offspring to sex traders. Often for as little as $50 USD. My ex is from Cambodia, born in the middle of a rice field during the Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot regime. She still has relatives there. Has neices and nephews that were, out of desperation, sold into sexual slavery.

More often than not, the consumers of the gratification are white American and European men. No surprise to me that Americans are targetted. What would any average, North American or European male be doing in the streets and countryside of Cambodia? Or Brazil, Colombia, Thailand, Panama, Dominican Republic or Costa Rica? No matter how you candy coat it this all comes down to power, control and coercion.

I'm not going to debate whether the guys in question are guilty or innocent because their is always 3 sides to every story. Your side, my side and the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If you had to go on stereotypical behavior given what was reported...well, you figure it out. And, I agree with whoever stated, "Why is this thread still in existence?"

dapanz1

_________________
Paradise= Sitting outside the Bodega in Panama City about 1 am. Drinking cool Balboas with cool friends and blazin' hot Colombianas. I want to be there..RIGHT NOW!

Maybe because guys, like yourself, keep posting on it.

_________________
Pura Vida
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four
essential food groups:
alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat.
Alex Levine

Point well taken. It's sensitive subject matter cuz I have a 5 yr. old daughter.

dapanz1

_________________
Paradise= Sitting outside the Bodega in Panama City about 1 am. Drinking cool Balboas with cool friends and blazin' hot Colombianas. I want to be there..RIGHT NOW!