I think one of the problems is that what was Women's Liberation was based on networks of small groups that met based on something in common, which could be area lived in, race, sexuality etc.. And what was discussed in groups would be shared and things in common noted. But no one group was ever thought to represent all women, let alone speak for all women.
However, the context in which this was happening didn't like this, respect it, or understand it. And it is the patriarchy's need to have leaders, to classified and create professionals and leaders that has eroded this process.
This isn't to excuse white women, or women who have some privilege within the system of exploiting their conections to become one of these artificial spokeswomen. ie a lot of grass roots feminists were only too happpy to create univeristy courses as though somehow you could teach other women's lived experiences as a theory. (And as we know the patriarchy destroyed whatever radical potentil there might have been in such courses by closing women's studies and creating gender studies. Such is the price of collaborating with the enemy.)
Unfortunately the publishing of so called leading feminists had litttle or nothing to do with what activists were engaged with and reflected those with the power to choose who had a voice and who didn't. Hence the growth in media feminism, which again might have had a roots in political practice, but over the years has just become a competition to get male approval. And that is what it is because men control the media, social media, publishing, education.
A lot of this is actually irrelevant tomost women, because it is about an elite group who certainly in the UK are more likely to be middle in not upper class and white. (I am not surprised that in terms of a career a Black woman would experience racism in the UK.*)
In some ways I cant help but think that not just the overt MRAs behind TRA, but also the context of having to appeal to men / male structures to be acknowledged is part of what is sapping real feminist activism.
WLM failed because it could work out how to knit together the genuine voices from a multiplicity of groups into a working politics.
But what is happening now in social media and published feminism has no basis because it is learnt from sources that are the ones that men allowed.
So whichever catch phrase is the currently acceptable one in either old or new media is no more than a word game.
I dont know how we stop this as we are so far down the cul de sac of misdirection by the patriarchal context we live in, with women more interested in competing to be the most feminist voice, that I dont see how we can get back to a place where women's voices and experience are equally heard and listened to.
(*) It is noticeable that the majority of Black Women's Organisations in the UK focus on employment and advancement. They dont bother with competing for most feminist theory or catch word, but on practical solutions.
Footnote: I've left out the malign / male line of funding and how that has corrupted and misdirected women's politics. As we know many of the women's groups that continue to exist do so because they colluded with their funders to distance themselves from the concept that women irrespective of race, class or education are the ones best able to direct what needs to be done. Not the well paid experts who get a secure job and are happy to appear on platforms to make men seem to be listening to women - whereas they are listening to their paid puppets.