The United States must be about to collapse as well. Bush recently signed legislation to punish broadcasters if raunchy programming exceeds "the bounds of decency". It seems that in America even adults can't be trust with sexual content. As usual, you point the finger at Russia when even more ridiculous things happen back at home. In fact, to use your perverse logic, the United States is just like the "good old USSR".

REITH: The fallacy in your pathetic argument is so ridiculous its surprising even from you. (a) The population of the U.S. isn't declining, its growing signficantly; (b) You give no example of any magazine or newspaper which has faced the sort of measures described in the article. What's more, as usual, you give no links to the source material for your claims, making them valueless and inane.

So, it's OK to have sexually explicit material in teen publications in a country with a declining population. That's an interesting opinion, although part of the problem in Russia is actually from AIDS contracted as a result of unprotected sex, so draw some rational conclusions if you are vaguely capable of it.
Frankly, it is a bit odd that you incessantly place the burden on supplying proof on your poor readers considering that you are so knowledgable about the absolute inferiority of Russia in relation to the rest of the world. If you will make some crass generalisations you should perhaps inform yourself instead of expecting other people to do it for you. A quick trawl on Google is all it takes after all. As you are too lazy and selective, here's an article about the sexually liberated America that you imagine Russia should be more like:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/15/AR2006061500951.html

That isn't even close to being a nice try. You're really quite small minded, aren't you little Reith?

What's not OK is (a) to attempt to justify Russian actions by referring to the faults of other counties, even though you don't apply the standard of those country's success to Russia because it's a "different country, and (b) to discourage sexual activity in a country on the verge of extinction.

What's OK is to encourage sex in a country with a declining population. In fact, it's basic biology, and only a moronic Russophile propagandist like you would fail to understand that. It's a bad idea for America to impose prudish restrictions too, but since America doesn't have a declining population it can afford this error better than Russia. And, of course, this blog isn't about America and couldn't care less what America does or doesn't do. If you want to talk about that, go to an America blog.

La Russophobe supports all her posts with links to source material. All thinking people do the same. Not very surprised to find out you are not one of those people.

I NEVER said America was sexually liberated or suggested that Russia should be like America in ANY way. YOU brought up America, you outrageously dishonest piece of dirt.

I said that RUSSIA should not discourage sex among its youth. Once again, you ignore the point in a really pathetic attempt at propaganda, which once again falls flat on its face.

"The fallacy in your pathetic argument is so ridiculous its surprising even from you. (a) The population of the U.S. isn't declining, its growing signficantly"

That's about the stupidest thing I read today...

There is absolutely no correllation between the amount of sex people have and the number of pregnancies taking place (in certain countries, Russian being one of them), especially when there are relativly efficient mean of contraceptions, such as condoms, pills, and abortions... which brings me to a conclusion that admins of LR were victims of unsuccessful abortions:-)

In the case of those magaizes (and I admit that they were never read by me for geographical reasons), if there are plausible legal arguments then they simply need to be appropriatly labeled or put into a special section. (knowing Russia, it has to be enforced too. BTW, I am throwing LRs a bone in regards to how Russian government enfoces laws:-) please climax in hate towards mediocre executive branch as you wish:-) )

However, this is nothing more than a personal self rightous crusade of some people, and it will not go anywhere. Remember Aschcroft and naked statue breast? Every once in while, there are people in governments, who try to impose their moral standards on others, even though they probably don't follow them in a first place.

I should assume that LRs don't use protection, or simply booked all the abortion appointments in a local clinic:-)

"There is absolutely no correllation between the amount of sex people have and the number of pregnancies taking place."

There is absolutely no correlation between your UNSOURCED ABSURD LIE and the truth.

Talk about the STUPIDEST think we've read THIS YEAR! Take a biology course, fella!

You must be a Russian! No wonder your population is falling!!

"especially when there are relativly efficient means of contraceptions, such as condoms, pills, and abortions"

once again LRs prove that they read selectively onle the things which feed their ignorant hate:-)

I rest my case....

You have no case. In two populations of women who both use the same amount of contraception, there will be more conceptions in the the group that has more sex compared to the one that has less. The fact that you don't understand this explains why Russia will soon be extinct, and indicates that you probably got ($$$) your "diploma" in Russia.

I guess Germans don't have sex then, neither do Japanese, and the rest of the developped world, where populations are decreasing...

I guess you don't get any either:-)

ANONYMOUS: No wonder you prefer to be anonymous, making such ludicrous statements as those. If you believe that the populations in Germany or Japan are decreasing in the same manner as Russia's is, please give links to support your "facts." Otherwise, you are nothing but a bald liar, a propagandist repeating absurd Neo-Soviet fiction and beneath both contempt and notice.

"Otherwise, you are nothing but a bald liar, a propagandist"

you mean you hear this everyday from people around you?

Enjoy:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007760

"I guess you don't get any either:-)"

haha, the poster was right! Same request as you, please provide to us a link to support your "facts" of getting some:-)

Thanks for the data! It states that America's birthrate is 2.07 while Russia's is a pathetic 1.2, which the article classifies as the "death spiral." Didn't you notice that fact in your own data, or are you just so petty and vindictive that you can't manage to acknowledge America's accompishment?

I guess you find some consolation in the fact that Italy and Spain are also in the "death spiral" range, but I doubt most Russians will feel OK about becoming extinct to know that some other countries in Europe are also going extinct. Or then again, maybe I'm wrong, and Russians are so aware of their own total failure that they actually want to commit suicide, and take down as many other countries as they can when they go.

But your ignorance analysis overlooks two key points: First, the standard of living in Italy and Spain is far higher than in Russia, and second, the countries are far smaller, which means that the loss of peole is less signficant. Russia is so vast that its demographic crisis makes it inevitable that large parts of the country will be gobbled up by countries like China.

So, thanks for bringing some data to the table, confirming that America is on track to dominate Europe and Russia, much of which will soon be extinct.

It's rather sad, though, that you still haven't been able to overcome the need to rationalize Russia instead of defending it. That is the attitude that brought the USSR to destruction ("Russian racism is OK because America has racism").

Also, now that you've been able to produce some data, you might try to go as far as to get a name.

Cheers and thanks for reading La Russophobe!

Oh, man... What a fucked up blog you've got there.

"What's OK is to encourage sex in a country with a declining population"
Um... Is it OK to encourage KIDS to have sex? Is it OK to tell them that they SHOULD have sex at the age of 13?
And it's not teens who read these three magazines. They prefer more mature Seventeen, Yes! and others. It's children who read them. About 10-14 years old.

I guess LR never lived in the Bible Belt... She herself might be a product of redneck incest at the age of 10:-)

La R.

I'd stopped reading the blog because I coulden't wade through all the inanane, nasty, name calling. I came back this AM and lo and behold, I saw the above.

Anyway, this entry reminds me of Vadimior Vladomirovh's comment that he was hesitant to support gay rights because of the demographic problem. It's ironic, because here in San Francisco we have the same problem in microcosum e.g. too few children in the City because young families can't afford to live here. However, gays are not only not part of ther problem but in fact, it seems that lesbians are having children at a slightly higher rate than stright women. A great lesbian gayby boom would actually be good for Russia.

Again - I don't like the abusive comments. They contribute nothing. You might consider a few basic rules (no profanity to start with) and try to instill some (democratic not Soviet :-) ) order.

All the best Grisha