There are many things about the church's prioritizing sins I just don't understand, frankly.
There was a pretty lady in my RCIA class. She was there to try to come to grips with her divorce. She had been married to a priest. He went back to being a priest without her.
Now that isn't so uncommon and at the time I thought his first duty was probably to the church. Years later I am having slightly different thoughts. HE NEVER TOLD HER HE HAD BEEN A PRIEST. That was deceitful and grossly unfair. Uh oh. I'm being grossly unfair as I only heard her side of the story.
She did go on to marry someone else and probably never became catholic.
I don't know if your perception about the churchmen being more threatened by men who wish to marry females is greater than their fear of the havoc that homosexuals can cause. Why do they insist on protecting these priests even after they are removed from parishes? It really sends the wrong message, to me at least. Marry a woman and start from scratch. Cause trouble by abusing parishioners and you get retirement pay for the rest of your life. What's wrong with this picture?
All I know is that I get more upset about certain things that the church seems to gloss over sometimes. It all depends on one's vantage point I suppose.
One of their goals, in 1982, was to force seminaries to accept practicing and avowed homosexuals, through whatever means possible, including denial of federal funds. Anybody remember "New Ways Ministry"? Well, they were only one group among dozens upon dozens of organizations pushing for homosexuals in our seminaries.
Our bishops need to get to the root of this problem, without haste, and yank it out! I am sure that if the bishops do their job, Our Lord will reward their effort with an abundance of good, healthy men who are waiting for the special and heroic task of working as a shepherd of souls.