As an aside, the adjective "sexy" is quite ridiculous if you think about it. It basically means "sex could break out at any time" like a flash-mob. Or, "ready to have sex at a moment's notice--you never know when it will happen."
I'm quite curious to learn what source(s) you used for your definitions. E.g., I strongly doubt that traditional textbooks on
moral theology would discuss your subject matter using the phrase "flash-mob". Or did you encounter the phrase during a critical review of "Francis" Bergoglio's "
Amoris Laetitia"[‡]?
Comparing 2 U.S. "college" dictionaries 2 decades apart, I discovered that the earlier dictionary (ca.
1950), by a publisher synonymous with such works, seems to have no entry for "
sexy", not even under some other
head-word. There were entries for enough closely related words that it seems highly unlikely to have been a matter of censorship.
Then after the "sɛҳuąƖ Revolution", as ascribed to the 1960s, was well underway:
sex·y (sek'sē) adj., [...]
1. Concerned predominately or excessively with sex: a sexy novel.
2. (of a person) sɛҳuąƖly interesting or exciting; radiating sɛҳuąƖity.
3. exciting or interesting: a sexy car.
Exercising the
charity that's appropriate toward this site's owner-
moderator, methinks he has, um, gone a wee bit wild with
exaggeration.
Keeping in mind that sex is a small, small fraction of one's life [...] it's really stupid to describe people in those terms.
The word and its phrases are simply extremely
subjective summaries of a person's
visual appeal--and not much more, except for what they reveal about the viewer. But I'd agree that the adjective is rather
silly to describe an automotive vehicle.
-------
Note ‡: That's "critical review" in a sense soething like this: I'm determined
not to be one of those people who vehemently criticizes a book or other docuмent that they haven't
actually read, but why, oh,
why, am I taking the time to read "
Amoris Laetitia", when I have a Resistance chapel and a growing household to care for!?