Same with Poland. The Western-Eastern distinction is an artifact of the Cold War, but it doesn't correspond well with the civilizational affiliations and historical experience of Central European nations.
Eg. Poland has rich traditions of democracy and civil freedoms - its Golden Liberty, and later, the first constitution in Europe - while Eastern Europe was typically autocratic.
Then there's being mostly catholic (and not orthodox), then there's the use of Latin alphabet (whereas Eastern Europe tends to use cyrillic), etc.
Of course pushing forward the category of Central Europe may stem from a variety of motivations, like some people just fearing the stigma of being "Eastern" as you say.
But this does not by itself invalidate the legitimate justifications for using the concept of Central Europe and it's certainly not enough of a reason to drop it altogether
Estonians and other Baltic states don't, Poland doesn't. Czech Republic probably doesn't. What about Slovenia, or Croatia, or Macedonia? Or Hungary?
Also maybe Russians identify as Russians and not Eastern Europeans.
>Northern part of South America
>Souther part of South America
Looks needlessly fragmented and imprecise. What is 'Southern part of South America'? Cono Sur? Then Brazilians from Minas Gerais and Porto Alegre are in different groups? Was that the intention? Why 'Southern North America' and not Central America? Where does Caribbean belong? Middle Asia (say, Kazakhstan)? Is Spain Western Europe or Southern Europe? Is Czech Republic Eastern Europe or Western Europe (since you don't offer 'Central Europe' as an option and some Czechs may be unhappy with identifying as Eastern Europeans)? Is Estonia in Eastern Europe? It damn well is in Eastern Europe, but some Estonians identify Estonia as Scandinavian.
Next time you guys should use some well established scheme such as this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_geoscheme and just link to it in the post so no one is confused.