I am paraphrasing, I don't remember the exact quote or chapter from Ascent of Mt Carmel. The lesson was about mortifying desires. Hence why I also quoted Solomon. He also did not mortify his desires and look what happened to him.

Mortifications of desires can be someone that is overlooked to the great determinant of spiritual religious.

A good example is fasting. It is good to fast, but if you are desiring food while you fast then you a hindering your progress. Once I learnt this I realise how much better I could have done this years lent, I was so hungry I did not mortify my desire for the 1 meal...

I always just assumed that Original Sin came down to us from both parents.

From what I've read, it is called the sin of Adam because he was the head and leader of Eve.  She was created as his help mate.  If Adam would have said no to Eve and corrected her, the original sin would not have passed down to his offspring.

Some Fathers argue that the sin of Eve was not to eat the apple, but to add to the words of God, for He said 16 And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat. 17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death. but she said 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat: and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die.
Thus bitting the apple was only Adam's sin, for Eve did not sin by eating it.

Other Fathers interpret the underlined this way: Eve acted as a figure of the Church, reasoning upon the Commandments of God.

I heard this also when I first started to take religion seriously.  The only people I've ever heard this "explanation" were from conservative lay-apologists.  Think people like Scott Hahn, though I can't say he's ever given this explanation.  I really don't remember many names anymore as I haven't paid any attention to these kinds of people in a long time.  I certainly have never read this in any catechism nor have I ever heard a traditional priest (I do not count FSSP priests in this category) say this.

Frankly, it sounds more like a conservative Protestant explanation made up by folks who consider themselves to be incredibly smart and spiritual rather than a Catholic explanation grounded in good theology.

Someone who studied theology (in a seminary for example) should chime in, but what I picked up from the upper year seminarians:

Adam was the head of the human race, so his sin was necessary to pass on an Original Sin to all man's descendants. If he had said "no" to Eve, there would be no Original Sin passed on. That much I'm sure about. Also, it WAS a fruit (not something like "sex"), not necessarily an apple (despite countless works of art over the past 6000 years). And of course, it was the disobedience to God's commandment that was the mortal sin.

But I also recall something about a necessary link between passing on Original Sin, concupiscence, and the male generative act. Am I correct, or am I remembering something wrong? I didn't get to 4th year (Year 1 of Theology) so that's why I'm asking for any ex-seminarian with some formal theology training to chime in. 

NOPE the soul is definitely created individually by God. The passing on of Original Sin has nothing to do with the origin of the soul.

And yes, that's not just maybe heretical. I think that's pretty solidly heretical. The soul has to be created by God because it's spiritual, and a thing has to have a proportionate cause. A fleshly creature (even an immaterial soul) can't just "create immortal souls". And let's face it, our souls aren't involved in making a baby. It's all auto-pilot, done by the body. My body (and/or my wife's body) which is 100% flesh CERTAINLY can't create something immortal, immaterial, and higher than itself, like a human soul. So yeah, God would have to create that part of a new human being.

I'm also pretty sure that St. Thomas taught that Original Sin was passed on by the man. At least that's what all my Thomistic upper-years at the seminary were saying. What I'm less sure about is HOW EXACTLY the man passes on that Original Sin.

Someone who studied theology (in a seminary for example) should chime in, but what I picked up from the upper year seminarians:

Adam was the head of the human race, so his sin was necessary to pass on an Original Sin to all man's descendants. If he had said "no" to Eve, there would be no Original Sin passed on. That much I'm sure about. Also, it WAS a fruit (not something like "sex"), not necessarily an apple (despite countless works of art over the past 6000 years). And of course, it was the disobedience to God's commandment that was the mortal sin.

But I also recall something about a necessary link between passing on Original Sin, concupiscence, and the male generative act. Am I correct, or am I remembering something wrong? I didn't get to 4th year (Year 1 of Theology) so that's why I'm asking for any ex-seminarian with some formal theology training to chime in.