The Tradëscan Codex

I like to think that third-wave feminism is better at this, but the truth probably is that it is better only in some ways, in some of those ways it is still not better enough, and in some other ways it's just as bad as it ever was. C'est la vie. As for my own practice, the fact that I'm not a woman makes speaking for all women more obviously problematic, of course, although I do think there are some claims one can't help but make.
Some generalisation is always inevitable and therefore it has to be forgiveable or you can't discuss the issues at all. Actually I do quite often see people saying 'all women or so close as to make the difference irrelevant' which I think shows they are at least trying, but(life being nothing if not ironic) in many ways that makes the problem worse - because if you happen to be outside the 'all' then you are left feeling that someone just said your experience was irrelevant. I'm not sure there is actually a solution to this. When discussing all these social issues which contain a large element involving feeling excluded from mainstream society it is inevitable that feelings about exclusion will be aroused to a greater than normal degree.

What gets my goat (an easily fetched beast on occasion) is that when I reject feminism because it excludes me I then quite frequently get feminists chasing after me, often quite angrily, and shouting that I have to be a feminist whether I want to accept the title or not. I tend to get quite rude about that stage.

the realization under third-wave feminism that there's no one single "women's lived experience."
Yep, that very much comes under the heading of no shit Sherlock, but I suppose I shouldn't be too rude, every set of ideas has to start from somewhere and is bound to make some pretty significant blunders along the way. Hence of course my personal strong imperative towards being a conservative - which at least gives a cushion of slowness against the blunders becoming too engrained before someone manages to point them out and stop them in their tracks. (Please excuse the horrendously mixed metaphors in that sentence.)

My first thought is that this sounds like a reasonable state of affairs--there are certainly more people engaged in acting ethically existing on this planet than engaged in meta-ethical theory.
Yes, you are probably right. I myself am never comfortable unless I work everything out right back to the bare bones, but I acknowledge this is more of a personal foible than anything I should expect of other people. It is though lovely to meet someone like yourself who is also willing to work on a similar basis.

that that type of theorizing is masturbatory, male-centered, or distracting from necessary good works and social activism. The last would be a good argument if I were more convinced there can be a sharp divide between theory and activism;
I don't see how one could ever divide the two completely, certainly not without living in constant dread that the house is built on sand.