Well, I can't totally agree with you.
I'm in the Episcopal Church, although a conservative. I've seen many years of the evolution of women priests.
The first wave consisted mostly of the sort of women you mention--they were more political than religious and very liberal.
We recently spent a year with a woman interim priest. She was wonderful. Then (to my admitted dismay) the vestry called another woman to be our rector.
She is the best preacher we have had in 30 years, very spiritual and wonderful in all ways.
On her first Sunday I was sitting sullen in my pew (I'd wanted a good looking man - ha -
When she walked down the aisle in procession, I had a road to damascus experience...it was like she had an aura. I felt right about her, and I've had no reason to change my mind.
There is nothing inherently wrong with being a woman, or a woman priest. It depends on the person.
Well, you make a good case that your preference is for a woman with whom you can discuss issues. Nothing wrong with that, but it is not the criterion for priesthood, as you might well be aware. Your post, however, neatly avoids any theological or ecclesiological reasoning, opting rather for a statement of personal comfort level.
Having a woman priest is simply wrongful as a matter of doctrine. The reasons are manifold and the only way one can evade them is to ignore them. Do so, if you wish, but then content yourself to be forever separated from any diocese I could be expected to doctrinally support and swear allegiance to. And remain aware that it was the insistence that women could be priests which originally cleaved the Church of England and her daughters from each other and from the wider Catholic communion. Twas this which caused the breach, not homosexuals and certainly not those who simply continued the doctrine their fathers bequeathed them. To endorse female priests is to break faith and it has led to so much additional pain and breakage one pauses to continue.
It does bear repeating, however.
Thanks.