I have similar oppositions to women in freemasonry as I do for women in the infantry.
I'm left of center, politically. Solidly so. Carried an ACLU card for a number of years.
But I am a practical man underneath it.
I served in the infantry, and I know the culture. I can see clearly that the tensions from a bunch of different directions would absolutely diminish the fighting effectiveness. Not just sexual relations, but in over protectiveness and the natural divisiveness that will come from courting favor, spoken and unspoken, acted upon and not acted upon, etc. I think we are all smart enough to understand that what I'm talking about isn't exaggerated or imaginary, but very real.
It would be divisive. And the infantry is a place where unity is priority.
Freemasonry is one of those very, very, very rare places, like the infantry - where unity must be the priority over everything else in order to accomplish its stated mission.
And in my view, that central mission is to make better men. In order to accomplish that, we must not have the distraction that will come with integration of the sexes. If we are to be able to lay bare our souls to one another, to be absolutely, 100% honest and on the level with each other, then no.
Now - separate lodges that are all female, with visitation between them? I'd support that, down the road. After the PH division is sorted for well and true.
But co-ed lodges, no. For the reasons I've stated and others. Skin color, religion, and all of those things are insignificant in comparison. Not because I view women as lesser, incapable, or any of that. But because the stated goal must take precedence, and because I believe having the majority of freemasonry made co-ed would reduce its effectiveness in a big way. The mission first.
Just my opinions.