Thanks for replies, everyone.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile
The biggest problem is that there's no objective measure. I mean, the only objective (biological) measure is reproductivity, but based on that there should be no divorces, only the fittest should reproduce, etc. There would be no place for love (and desire). I personally perceive that as an inhumane society. Why? Because I've been raised in Russian culture where love is important. In the caste system, love can or cannot be important based on the other more sacred factors. I recently spoke with an Indian colleague and he said that presently in India you can as a couple ignore the caste system if you love each other, but you would have to leave your parents (for whom the caste is more important than love) and move to another place where nobody knows you.
Thanks for the insight, Croc. The reason I mentioned India is because I was quite struck with the respect they seem to have for marriage, just to compare Bollywood couples who seem to be pretty constant and the Hollywood ones who are splitting right, left and centre... I do think that respect for family and marriage are things that should be upheld... supported and promoted. I grew up seeing and hearing so much about divorce, and seeing beautiful and seemingly reasonable couples breaking up, I was quite convinced I should never marry at all -- what for, if you're gonna split up anyway.

Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile
What is a progressive society? People en mass rarely reflect on what they are doing, let alone on what type of society they are. They form their opinions based on very arbitrary factors, such as who can say things cooler, stricter, funnier and louder. Other things are just the society customs. For example: inmates in Russian jails despise "roosters", but almost anyone can become a "rooster" after being "put down". And those very same "roosters" are "being used" by those very same inmates! How's that working with the logic? No logic. The society custom.
These things are sort of biological -- you can see them in hens, for example: hierarchy, pecking order, Alpha and Omega hens, who can peck whom, etc. It's supposed to reduce aggression -- when everyone knows their place in the scale of things (at least, that's what we were told in ecology lessons). But human beings can build a better society.

Quote Originally Posted by Vincent Tailors
Of course not. What a dumb question.
I'm not sure I know what you mean... Do you mean that Russians are anti-gay and racist and so on but there's no need to change it or that we are nothing of the sort? If the latter, I wish I could be as confident as you and refute such accusaions with a simple "stuff and nonsense." This opinion about Russians as racists seems to be rather spread. At least I'm a bit tired of reading such things. It's not as though there are no skinheads in GB, for instance.

Threads on Russian are habitually closed at the message board I took that quote from because they frequently degenerate into dubbing Russians "racist" and so on. Like this one.

Quote Originally Posted by "Crocodile
Period. (I think)
Uh-huh. Or "full stop" in British English.

Quote Originally Posted by SAn
So, if they are so good, why they are scaring small children?
*amused*Have you seen no black people in pictures or cartoons, like "Каникулы Бонифация"? I was at a practice in school a few years ago and they had a black girl staying. She was SO popular, kids were fighting amongst themselves to be her friend, to sit with her, to walk round the school with her and so on.

Quote Originally Posted by SAn
P.S. What is «anti-what-not»?
whatnot = и т.п.