It's like the difference between "my shit", "your shit", and "that shit". You're not actually referring to your own things as feces, or calling it "shitty". It's just your shit. As in "Don't touch my shit". But when you're referring to someone else's shit as "your shit" or "that shit" it's more derogatory. Like, "clean up that shit" or "get your shit out of here".

The context changes "shit" from derogatory to neutral. Similarly, "dude" can be both gender specific and neutral depending on context.

Note that people are still allowed to prefer not to be referred to as "dude", but it's a gender neutral term in many contexts nonetheless.

In the '60s, I made love to many, many women, often outdoors, in the mud and the rain, and it's possible a man slipped in. There would be no way of knowing.

Then educate yourself. See definitions 1 and 2 for noun and definition for interjection.

You're literally arguing that this word should specifically exclude women, while complaining that double meanings never include women. It makes no sense. Why wouldn't you want to take power over the word to make it apply to women too?

In San Diego the default assumption of "dude" is that it can be literally anyone or any thing.

The people there accepted this decades ago. It's not one person's experience. It's a shared experience of millions. It's a geographically specific situation with the Smurf language phenomenon. Any noun can be Smurf and everyone there understands the smurfing meaning when it's smurfing said.