I think it depends on what sort of books you are talking about and in what context. Sometimes I worry that the term "chick lit" is used to dismiss books that take relationships and women's lives as their major themes.
The term always sounded a bit derogatory to me - not just in terms of the audience but for the authors too, but I guess others may say it's empowering. Wikipedia says other terms were coined but didn't stick.
side note: While trying to think of a better term, the word "womance" popped in to my head and refuses to leave. Now all I can hear is Jonathan Ross saying it.
I think of 'chick lit' as all the rubbish I read with sparkly covers, ideal for the bus and the bonfire. I read one recently which referenced my area and was howling with laughter at the appalling research. I still read it though, and I quite enjoyed it.
I think 'chic lit' has changed though. Jilly Cooper, Jackie Collins, Shirley Conran were great. Jill Mansell and Marian Keyes have had their moments, but I think the proliferation of dreadful Irish authors (no tax to pay so publish anything) have done real damage to the genre of romantic fiction directed at women.
I wouldn't change the term to 'crap lit', even if I think it's more descriptive, because I think reading anything is better than not reading at all, especially if you are young.
What's wrong with 'love stories', that's what most chic lit books end up being.