ECUSA (TEC) Now Sedevantist?

Given what traditionalists within The Episcopal Church (ECUSA/TEC) believe about the invalidity of female ordination, does this mean ECUSA/TEC is, from their point of view, without a Presiding Bishop? Are they Anglican sedevacantists? Logically, they should be. If invalid matter was used in the sacrament of ordination (a female rather than a male), there was no consecration. And if a non-bishop is elected Presiding Bishop and consecrates other bishops, they are ipso facto also non-bishops.

If memory serves, one (perhaps several) of the speakers at the 1977 Congress of Concerned Churchmen in St. Louis made this very argument: If one consents to ordain women priests, one can hardly withhold from them the episcopate. And in time, these invalid "bishops" will continue until there are no bishops left in (then-)PECUSA ordained by men, leaving the denomination without bishops.

Which just proves what traditionalists said 30 years ago: there can be no compromise of the church's ancient apostolic faith, order, or morals. Had traditionalists heeded this simple truth three decades ago, they would not now be faced with the choice of accepting a non-bishop as Presiding Bishop, searching for alternative oversight in a body that still regards this woman and others throughout the Anglican Communion are considered actual bishops, or investigating the claims of another Church.

Perhaps GenCon '06 was the beginning of the Episcopaless Church?