I consider these these dialogues about strong women etc as actually super sexist and patronizing for both women and readers of any gender, and I can't even understand what authors want to do when they do that. I don't find that preachy, I find that ambiguous in a very nasty way.
More generally, though, I think it's going back to that problem of 'showing, not telling'. If you show me in a clever, not over-the-top way, what you believe in, it will be easy for me to follow you the time of the story, (even if I don't have exactly the same principles/beliefs etc; but not if it's too outrageous).
If you only tell me, awkwardly, often lazily... it won't work.
I like @liann consent example: consent is extremely important to me, and I'm very often repused by stories where consent is not clearly there; but I'm also put off by stories where consent is awkwardly discussed in a way I could not imagine it being discussed in real life except in very specific situations (I've read a few time 4th wall breaking in this situation, that's incredibly off putting in ALL cases, except maybe if educational is the main aim).
Situations where actual dialogue about consent would be appropriate is when one or more protagonist would have a reason to believe consent is a difficult notion for other protagonist. In other cases, I expect to be SHOWN consent, not read a thesis about it.
But finally, the only cases that are really unacceptable for me and and will make me drop the story is when the intentions of the author are suspicious like in the first example about strong women.