It's hard to generalize like that. In some aspects the Orthodox Church is less dogmatic, but in others the Orthodox lead the way in being inflexible.
Liturgically, Mary is always mentioned as "Our most pure, ever-vrigin Lady, the Theotokos," but the Council of Ephesus refers to her only as the Holy Virgin Mary, Theotokos (Mother of God).
There is no doubt that all Christian Churches from that day on (early 5th century) subscribed to her as the Mother of God and that to this day the Churches that evolved from the Undivided Church (Latin, Greek, Coptic, Syrian) consider her a perpetual Virgin liturgically and otherwise.
There is no doubt that most Church theologians considered her pure before and after the Birth even as early as the 3rd century, and the Protoevangelium of James, an influential second century book is the main source of that belief only decades removed from the last living first century Apostles.
So, we can pretty much be sure than at least part of the Church believed in her perpetual virginity as early as the second century. That's 1,900 years! Does that prove it is true? Of course not. But it is pretty amazing that it was accepted as such as a matter of faith (de fide) early on, although it was not necessarily taught as a prerequisite for our salvation.
As a Protestant, though, I find a much greater stand-off with Roman Catholicism in that they demand you must accept everything said, everything based on that tradition and 1500 years of research, or you are a heretic (denying the Catechism) and will not be saved.
The Orthodox may appear less dogmatic because they have fewer dogmas, but the stricter adherence to Tradition makes them equally stand-offish, maybe even more, than the Catholics. Also, in the West, the word "heretic" attained a meaning somewhat different from the original. That's just because the Latin fathers were such poor learners of Greek. :)
wohich the English version was derived means to set aside. In fact it used to apply to things set aside for God (as sacrifice), but in Christianity, especially in Ecumenical Councils, it attained a meaning of being considered outside of Christianity (which could be interpreted, based on the belief that salvation is only in Christ, as equivalent to someone being condemned to hell, although this was to the meaning of anathemas).
After the break between the East and the West, the West "radicalized" the meaning of heresy to include even a ritual of condemning the anathematized to hell, which is scandalous to say the least.
I guess I think Christianity is a pretty simple set of ideas and beliefs, not a 2000+ list of rules and regulations to be followed. Christ set us free from the legalities of the Old Testament; to this Protestant the Catholic Church is attempting to take us back to those thousands and thousands of rules and regulations.
You would find that the Orthodox and Catholics stand united in disagreeing with you here. Having been voted somoene's favorite Bible skeptic on the FR, even I would have to disagree with you on that one. :)
I understand that; however, my understanding is that the Orthodox would not condemn me to hell; the Catholic would.