I completely understand what point you're trying to make. But certain "freedoms" are an ingrained part of Western culture. Usually, when referring to countries overseas, you may find that some people are denied those very same elements of Western culture. Yet within their own culture, they have a variety of other freedoms which may contribute to their overall life satisfaction.
For example, using your logic, a Westerner may have freedoms A-G. A person in another country, depending on which one they live in, may have freedoms A-C, and O-R.
A Western society, in my eyes, is preferential, not for the unlimited number of freedoms and such, but for things such as financial security and relative peace and stability when compared to war-torn countries like Iraq. When one compares a Western society with an Eastern one, you need to realise you are comparing two fundamentally different cultures. You cannot say, one society is by far better than another by just considering one factor, in this case, freedoms, because when determining happiness you need to consider a multitude of factors, not just one.
And to narrow it down further, to make a judgement even more accurate, you would need to consider a person's individual circumstances and not society's circumstances as a whole. When taking into account that many factors that contribute to general happiness and wellbeing, the fact that a person is banned from entering bars and concerts seems pretty minor.