Just because someone does not have such an intense interest in women does not mean that they cannot sin in having unchaste thoughts about them! Maybe since they are not in heresy and God is good, their prayers for purity in mind actually worked! You seem to be rejecting any such grace, not to mention the grace of baptism and the sacraments against concupiscence.
Any lack of natural attraction to the opposite sex or total lack? In either case, you are accusing St. Thomas Aquinas, young people in general, and many saints of unspeakable things, for the petty reason that they were not as predisposed to lust as you would have all men be. It is perfectly reasonable to be grossed out by the details of feminine nakedness and other practical considerations. Just ask your nearest boy or girl who does not have a dirty mind! Call it Asperger's or whatever you want: some of us will not change our perspective unless acceptable evidence is put forth, and that is not an anecdote, or a million of them, neither is it the pious thought of some saint, or the deduction of some theologian: it must be from the universal magisterium of the Church.
That poses an another question: what if they are visibly wearing St. Philomena's cord on their waist? Then, there is even less motive for the supposed scandal.
There's got to be a name for this heresy -- throwing prudence and natural considerations to the wind, as if the supernatural can make void all things natural. As if one can count on supernatural grace to COMPLETELY HEAL all the effects of original sin, concupiscence -- such that men and women can live in common in a community, for example.
You must pray as if all depends on God, but do your part as well. I knew a young man who unwittingly seduced a married 40-something woman with a lot of children. They used to pray together (Divine Mercy in particular) and make long thanksgivings after Mass, kneeling next to each other. No one suspected a thing or saw any problem -- until actual adultery took place. Then the man was almost shot by the husband (the husband was a gun nut and a mechanic), fortunately the spurned husband just shot the man's truck -- but in a vulnerable spot which destroyed the truck. The young man was forced to leave the SSPX chapel and quickly became sedevacantist. After making the 3.5 hour journey to the closest chapel (happened to be sedevacantist), he soon quit going altogether. He got into astrology, and soon after completely apostatized. Years later (during covid) I learned that he was shacking up with some other woman one generation older than him.
I should also point out he was big-time into the "manosphere" he called it -- basically the MGTOW movement. He was very cynical about women. The MGTOW movement teaches that women are little more than children (of course, for some modern women this is basically true) who need to be put in their place, looked down upon, etc. They use expressions like AWALT (All Women Are Like That) "She's not yours, it's just your turn.", "One-itis" (any attempt to think one woman is special, wanting to pair up permanently with one woman) and so on. Many "players" who are into "The Game" (philanderers into frequent fornication) participate in the MGTOW movement.
Piety, grace, the sacraments are NOT a full cure for Original Sin and its effects. Baptism washes away Original Sin BUT leaves all the wounds intact. We still suffer from ignorance, concupiscence, malice, suffering, and eventually death.
Didn't the Beguines fall into a similar error during the Middle Ages? And as Fr. Iscara (our history professor) pointed out, the two groups (one male, one female) started shacking up eventually. They believed that once you were a certain level of holy, you couldn't sin, or something to that effect.
There have been some very interesting chapters and episodes in Church history. And as they say, "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it."
Topic: Opposite Gender Proximate Presence Not Sinful (Read 5423 times)