here is a thread on AIBU about the fact apparently only 9% of women say they are feminists. I would not be surprised if it were lower if the survey takers were to see some of the comments here.
After 30 years of being a feminist I no longer call myself one, because current day feminism (in its various forms) appears to have moved on from my understanding of it. So it no longer fits me as a descriptor.
However I'm not reeling further from femisinim specifically due to Gwen's comments about some child abusers not being true pedophiles. We had a case over here, some time ago now, where a nursery nurse was sexually abusing teeny tinies in her charge in order to record the acts to gratify a pedophile she wanted to please/impress. I'd only disagree with Gwen if she stated that the motivation made the crime, and the criminal, "less bad" than somebody doing purely for sexual gratification.
It's not unheard of, for people to do unthinkable things to curry favour with a dominant personality they are desperate to impress, or hold onto. Doesn't make them less culpable, dangerous, or horrendous than somebody abusing a child for their own sexual pleasure. They are still abusing children for their own ends and desires. Still deserve to be locked up for the same amount of time as people doing it for different reasons. Still need to be kept away from children forever and absolutely deserve all the disgust and revulsion that becomes entwined with their name.
And that's where I would disagree with assertions that Hindley was "less bad". I don't care if she actively enjoyed her role in harming children, or instead did it to please/impress Brady and drew gratification from it via that route. She chose her own desires over the need of children not to be kidnapped, raped, abused and murdered. Which makes her a horror. A dangerous, warped, horror. Her motivations neither aggravate, nor mitigate what she did.
Extreme people pleasers who will participate in abuse, torture, kidnap and murder in order to achieve their their aims of gratifying the desires of a love interest are no less dangerous and culpable than those who have other motivations and triggers into harmful, or deadly action.
If the extreme people pleasers tend to be female (for reasons of nature, nurture, or societal shaping) then it is worth looking into why. But I don't see it as a priority cause that feminism needs to address. Which is where I largely agree with the thrust of your post. There are strands of feminist thought and focus which receive enough (perhaps disproportionate) attention and exposure to convince large numbers of females that their priorities are distinctly out of step with feminism, so they neither see themselves as a feminist, nor want to. Either ever, or anymore.