Does anyone care?
Especially since it was the inbred Henry's fault there was no male heirs.
Henry DID father a male, albeit illegitimate, child who survived beyond the few weeks his and Catherine's male child did so you point doesn't actually hold true.
Catherine was a brilliant woman. SSSSalt of the friggin earth no question about it.
Catherine was an idiot! She was offered an honourable 'retirement' which she refused; this would have kept her only child in line to the throne (instead of being declared a bastard). SHE caused the split from Rome through her own pig-headedness - but then what do you expect from any religious nut? She had to declare herself 'virgo intacta' after Arthur's death in order to fulfil her parent's wish for her to marry Henry but let's think about this logically for a moment . . . I doubt very much that a teenage boy faced with a willing girl in his bed WOULDN'T be able to perform unless he found her totally physically repulsive (but to quote an old saying "you don't look at the fireplace while you're poking the fire"!) or if he was gay. Back then life was short and people often married and had children when they were still frighteningly young to our modern sensibilities - women RARELY lived long enough to become menopausal - and it's doubtful Arthur would have been a virgin himself when he married Catherine, her words about doubting that Arthur would 'ever be able to have relations with me' probably meant that she found no sexual satisfaction with him and as there was a belief back then that women needed to achieve orgasm to conceive this would make absolute sense.
