Addressing the lady asking the question, I would first note that I am not your rav or moreh derech; all I can bring to this question is my own opinion, based on years of experience with many couples. What I can say, definitively, based on that experience, is that the “mingling” that you describe is not just unhealthy — it’s dangerous.
While “dangerous” may seem an extreme word to use, consider for a moment what we mean when we say something is dangerous. We don’t let our young children cross the street, for example, because of the danger. Even though on more than 99 out of 100 occasions that a young child does run across the street, nothing happens, it’s still dangerous, because in the event that something does happen, it can easily be fatal.
I am no extremist, but I know for certain that everyone who is involved with shalom bayis issues in this day and age can bring examples of serious relationship issues that started out at “innocent” social get-togethers. Without anyone intending for things to become a problem, some situations ended with devastating consequences (while others had less devastating but still far from desirable results). I am not talking about a level of danger that is one in a thousand.
Not everything is considered mingling. Men and women speaking occasionally in a formal manner, or responsibly, isn’t mingling. One’s level of piety and care to keep a distance from women can depend on many things, but mingling is something else. What I’m referring to are informal encounters in social settings such as meals, outings, and vacation.
The Yetzer Hara’s Trap
One of the traps the yetzer hara uses to cause us to stumble is packaging something potentially very dangerous as “not a big deal.” In all the cases I have knowledge of, things started from something so seemingly innocuous that it would have been hard to say that it was prohibited. But that’s how the yetzer hara works — he instills doubt, making us wonder, “What could be wrong with that?”
This is perhaps why the only place in the entire Shulchan Aruch where we find the warning, “me’od me’od” (very, very) used is in relation to the separation and distance necessary between men and women. The warning is given specifically to men, who are told to “keep very, very far from women.” Here we see the great sensitivity of Chazal on this issue and their great awareness and understanding of human nature, because no one sets out to step beyond red lines, but even getting close to the red line is dangerous.
Community Sensitivities
People who try to challenge this often point to instances where mingling takes place, even regularly, yet “nothing bad happens.” Now, aside from the fact that sadly, “bad” things do happen, although not all the time, even one in a thousand situations of damage is a huge tragedy that could have been averted if Chazal’s guidelines had been respected.
But there’s another important point that’s relevant here. When comparing with or emulating those who are less stringent in this or any area, we must also acknowledge that different communities have different levels of sensitivity to different issues. In some communities, other red lines are stressed far more, whereas — just for example — having couples mingle is something that people don’t think twice about. What this means is that in places where this is not seen as acceptable, failing to keep a distance from red lines will have graver consequences, as people still have the level of sensitivity in this area that Hashem intends us to have.
When a certain sensitivity is lost, it can appear to make things simpler, now that the previously questionable behavior is normalized. Often, however, what this really means is that people have simply lost the special level of sensitivity that the Torah should imbue us with. Becoming desensitized to the extent that mingling isn’t seen as a big deal is a tremendous loss.
To give a (slightly extreme) example: Imagine if somebody were to ask about the permissibility of making a chasunah without a proper mechitzah, using the argument that in some communities this is done and not known to cause problems (which may or may not actually be the case). If this person is suggesting introducing this type of chasunah to a community where it is unheard of, the likelihood is that it will cause far more problems than in places where those types of chasunos are the norm. And further — why would he want to degrade their sensitivity in this area, even if it was not going to cause specific problems, in the first place?
