hereby the word version, hope it works. Sorry for the delay.
I agree with the idea that “culture and nature are interconnected and responsive and not two distinct parallel entities, whereby it became an almost neutral and non-effecting position next to the social cultural one”. Both culture and nature are not part of another or completely distinct, they are connected to each other and also construct each other. Furthermore, I think your idea that “sexual selection can be influenced by culture, or even seen as a cultural selection” is very interesting. As you wrote, “evolution is a systematic openness”, I think feminists definitely can use Darwin’s theories to tackle some problems.
1) Well written, you mentioned a lot of important thoughts.
2) I believe that the relations between the natural, sexual and artificial selection could be better explained. Grosz does not describe those as opposite, rather the sexual selection is presented as an "offshoot" of natural selection and the artificial as maybe an extension of natural selection through human-induced criteria (however, I do believe that here the exact relation is not quite explained.) Also, Grosz does not link (or even mention) culture with sexual selection. She rather describes how sexual selection can sometimes act against the principles of natural selection.
3) The principles are just briefly mentioned but it would be better to explain them. I do not think it is necessary to list all the principles from the text, I believe it would be more valuable if you mentioned what you personally find the most valuable input of Darwin's theory for feminism, and ideally think of some specific examples of their incorporation into the feminist discourse.