www.CostaRicaTicas.com

_________________
The sexiest part of the human body? The brain.

What part? All of it or ________?

Berk....

_________________
FRUITCAKE... and you thought it was something you eat! Not on CRT!

As I understand Wikipedia, users are allowed to add and post comments and descriptions.

As to the accuracy of the noted reference to a large number of girls working in the sex industry, I agree. I have more than a few friends that I pick up in front of Pali in Desemparados.

Yes the grographical info is correct.

Yes the history of how and when areas were desinated is correct.

yes, it does seem that a disporportionly large number of the 'working chica' either come from or live in Desamparados

And the area with probably the second largest # would probably be Hatillo with Barrio 15 de setiembre de Hatillo probably having by far the largest # of working chicas of any Barrio.

Went with my ex girlfriend to her son's kindergarden graduation in 15 de setiembre last year. Out of 52 mothers, I recognized 22 as working chicas and my ex pointed out 3 or 4 others that "had retired". Also according to her and from what I saw, it seems the average chica living in 15 de setiembre starts 'working' at about 14 years of age.

_________________
Old and retired but still bang, and bang, and bang!!!

When at HDR or SL there is nothing wrong having the security person re-check a chica's ID.

_________________
The sexiest part of the human body? The brain.

As I have reported many times trying to warn guys, there are und***ge chicas in any freelance place on a regular bases. As for having the guard recheck the cedula, I WISH IT WERE THAT EASY!! These chicas are very crafty and the guards could really care less for the most part. The chicas use their older sisters cedula, a cousin's or even an aunt's and in many cases they look a lot alike and pictures are notoriously bad. As I have posted before, I took my ex novia's cedula away from a 17 yo chica one night (and she did not look anything like my ex). I know one chica that went to work when she was barely 14 and she did not get caught till the week before her 18th birthday. Several guys have posted about how great a certain chica was when they did her 1-2 years ago (she is one of the all time most popular chicas) and she is 18 right now.

Over the years there has occasionally be und***ge chicas pulling a scam on gringos. They get to the room with a guy, get undress, then tell the poor guy "I am 17; give me $500 -$1000 or I will call the police. The last time I was in Granada Nicaragua, there were 2 working as a team. One was 14 and they were scamming guys like crazy. I talked to them for a while and they finally admitted to me that the one was 14, then started promising me they would not get me in trouble. I told them I did not do Ch*ldren and they started cursing me.

The reason I stress this is: the law does not care what she told you or showed you; if she is under 18 your ass is grass- period!!!

Point is: If she looks very young, run like hell no matter how hot she may be--Trust your instints; not what she tells or shows you!!

_________________
Old and retired but still bang, and bang, and bang!!!

One has to be very careful here. The differences might seem subtle but, from a purely logical and analytical standpoint, saying that a large number of a certain work group come from a certain area is not the same thing as saying a large number living in that certain area also work in that certain group, which is what this article at least seems to imply (or what many of its readers may incorrectly infer ).

I'll give a different example to illustrate. Is saying that a large number of cab drivers in the US come from India the same thing as saying a large number of Indians in the US are cab drivers? I suppose the latter inference might be true but, if so, would be purely by coincidence rather than any logical deduction. It could just be that the number of ALL cab drivers is such a relatively small portion of the total US population or even just of the total Indian population in the US. In that case, even if ALL cabbies were Indians, there would still only be a relatively small percentage of all Indians that were cabbies. (Didya get that? No? Too bad. I'm not going to try restating THAT again )

Getting back to the case of working girls in CR, IF a large number of the women in Desamparados are prostitutes, from a logical standpoint couldn't that just as easily be a result of a) a disproportionate number of chicas from poorer backgrounds in CR turning to the sex trade to earn their living in general and b) any chica working the sex trade in the SJ area is more likely to come from or live in one of the nearby poorer neighborhoods rather than say come from some well to do family in Ezcazu? And, if that is what is going on here, then wouldn't one expect similarly poor barrios to have similar "disproportionate" number of sex workers. BangBang's comments actually tend to support that conclusion and even speculates that the number of working girls in 15 de Setiembre is even higher than it is in Desamparados. I'd ask that, if that is true, then how noteworthy is the observation about Desamparados in wiki?

We, as a group, obviously have a lot of contacts with "working girls" and in our conversations with them we discover many in fact come from or live in those neighborhoods (apparently some of us even go there to pick them up), but how many of us go out and actually poll those neighborhoods to discover how many of those neighborhoods earn their living by other means. The problem here is that this sort of comment does seem to suggest that most or certainly a large number of Desamparados residents are prostitutes AND that (again assuming that observation is true) that it is somehow more true of Desamparados than it is of other neighborhoods. The observation that many poor chicas in the SJ area work in the sex trade and live in poor neighborhoods might be appropriate in an article and how large the sex trade is in CR in general, but IMHO is not in an extremely short article on a particular poor barrio that finds little else to say about that barrio other than providing its size and population.

BTW, I also find the comment about chicas working at the Horseshoe, Elite or Tango India somehow being more "entreprenuerial" than the independent working girls that work at say the HDR or KL. What does that even mean and how can the author say that? Also, on his 2 person list of notable people from Desamparados he lists "Maribelle (Manager of the Horseshoe Casino in San Jose)". She's notable? The author doesn't seem to even know her last name. And unlike the facts about population, size and history, the author failed to include any citations to support his observations about sex workers. I strongly suspect that this article was written by some Gringo denizen of the Gulch rather than by ICT, Mayor johnny Arayas or even an actual resident of Desamparados.

READER'S DIGEST VERSION FOR THOSE NOT WANTING TO READ MY LONG POSTS: I guess what I'm trying to say in nut shell is that, to the extent this observation is true, it is more noteworthy as a reflection on CR, or at least SJ and its immediate environs, than it is on little Desamparados, which is just one of several poor barrios for which the same observation could just as easily be made.

Prolijo,

I am not 100% sure of what you are trying to say (this old brain of mine just does not function on a high intellect level). I think you are trying to say that these comments about Desemparados and Hitillo are not based on scientific evidence and thus have no bases in fact. This may well be a fact. I do not know the origin of the comments in Wikipedia and they may well be just as much based on personal opinion and personal observation as my comments are. Point is I do not think many would take either as being absolute fact. I know for sure that my comments were simply based on my observations from knowing and having met and talked to 100s of local 'working chicas' over the past few years. I would never imply nor want anyone to take my observations to being based on scientific fact.

That said, there is no doubt that there are many very poor areas in and around San Jose and that chicas come from all areas, including Escazu. (there are actually poor areas even in Escazu) I would also say without doubt that most of the 'working chicas' come from very poor, AND DESPERATE backgrounds. Thus one could ASSUME that most of the 'working chicas' come from the poor areas. It is, I believe, a fact that Desamparados and Hatillo are two of the largest and poorest of all the Barrios. One could thus assume that these two areas have the largest number of 'working chicas'. (Again an assumption)

My comments are based on my observations from asking several 100 chicas where they are from, and knowing that (without an actual count) well over 50% say they are from Desamparados. Again this has nothing to do with what % of chicas living in any area is 'working'. My comments on Hatillo as a whole are also based on personal opinion and observation, BUT my comments on the small sampling of mothers in 15 de Setiembre IS bases on actual count and, I believe, could be used to deduce that there is a disproportionally large % of 'working chicas in that area. Also I have spent many days in 15 de Setiembre and know many, many people there. Everyone i have ever talked to there seems to be of the opinion that EVERY chica who grows up there will at some point sell her body. It amassed me at how much this was just accepted as being a fact even by the mothers of small chicas.

NOW IN CONCLUSION: REALLY WHAT DIFERENCE DOES ALL THIS MAKE, As mongers,how many of us are really that concerned about where in San Jose the chica comes from?????

_________________
Old and retired but still bang, and bang, and bang!!!

That und***ge thing is a not a problem for me 'cuz I like older-looking, more mature women anyway (yeah, that's a snotty comment). The last time there I "pulled" from HDL and the woman said she lived in the Canton but was very quick to add "San Miguel". Is this Distrito somewhat more upscale?
The "Canton" word--is that another reason CR is misleadingly called the "Switzerland of Central America"?
Another reason to take Wikipedia with a grain or two of salt--this from somebody who links it frequently. The article's point seems to be a disguised ad for the Horseshoe Casino. But then I'm probably just another cynical Gringo.

_________________
"A man accustomed to hear only the echo of his own sentiments, soon bars all the common avenues of delight, and has no part in the general gratification of mankind"--Dr. Johnson
"Amen, brother"-ED

Gee, I wonder if you could really talk to them, if it would be easier to find out

Cujo

_________________
"Pain is the fuel that fans the flames of my pyre. A battle plan is only as good as the general carrying it out on the field. This is my war son, and I have the biggest bombs and the smallest conscience"...

Bang, its no reflection on your age or brain. As I said from the very beginning, the distinction I was trying to draw was very subtle. And the logical reasoning involved can be as difficult to lay out as it is to follow.

The factual basis of where the comments in question started is certainly one of my points, but even if you accept as fact that many sex workers come from or live in Desamparados, so what? I agree with what you said - how many of us are really that concerned about where in San Jose the chica comes from. BTW, your own informal study at the kindergarten graduation and your "Studs Terkel style" interviews may not be strictly scientific, but I didn't mean to cast any aspersions on them and would actually accept them as sufficient basis to accept your conclusions as fact, which is that these chicas actually come from a variety of poor barrios around the SJ area. And that actually supports my point that there is nothing especially noteworthy about working girls coming from or living in Desamparados.

The part where I think some of you guys may still be a little confused about the point I was trying to make is in the logical rather than factual area. Perhaps if I add some hypothetical numbers to it, it will become clearer. Saying that it is noteworthy that most or many sex workers live in Desamparados seems to suggest to me that the author was implying that a significant number of Desamparados residents are sex workers (please re-read this sentence if that is unclear). Maybe I was just inferring that he was trying to suggest that, but those 2 statements are hardly the same thing. Suppose there are 4000 girls who regularly ply the trade, mostly in the gulch but also at various mp's, bars and niteclubs nearby, and that half of them live in Desamparados. That equates to about 2000 women. According to that wiki article Desamparados has nearly 207,000 residents. So that amounts to less than 1 in 100 of them being sex workers, a bit high to be sure, but noteworthy? I don't think so. Especially if the other poor barrios of SJ have similarly high rates. Maybe there are more than 4000 sex workers in the SJ area but there are certainly not anywhere close to 207,000 so the portion of Desamparadans who are sex workers can't be nearly that high.

If anything, assuming this observation to be true, the high numbers of working chicas is really a CR or SJ phenomenon and not a canton specific one. Otherwise, I'd say let's all just take the bus out to Desamparados and hit the local MP's there since there are supposedly so many more working girls in that area.

I hope that has made what I meant a little easier to follow.

Got a bus schedule?

_________________
The sexiest part of the human body? The brain.