[EliRivers]

I'm using the common dictionary definitions I find, which granted is by no means a guarantee of what the word "means".

dictionary.com gives me "the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men", which to my mind suggests that if someone is "all for equivalence" then equivalence for women is a subset of that, so includes feminism.

So yes, I stand corrected. Being "all for equivalence" includes feminism, but is more than feminism; the OP is a feminist, and more.

[smoyer]

Except I didn't actually state that I was only for the equality of men and women ... There are a lot more inequalities that can be overcome (starting with stereotypes and prejudices).

[EliRivers]

"Except I didn't actually state that I was only for the equality of men and women"

You stated you were not for equality of men and women ("I am not a feminist") but then you immediately changed your mind and said "I am all for equivalence".

You are, as I said, a feminist and more. A feminist because you are for equivalence of men and women, and more because you are for equivalence of others as well.

[arbus]

Words have different meaning to different people. The Feminism label carries a political context that Egalitarianism label does not and not every Egalitarian is automatically a feminist as you claim.

[EliRivers]

"not every Egalitarian is automatically a feminist as you claim."

Using the definition I gave (which is quite literally the dictionary definition), they are. I acknowledge that many people (in the US) seem to use the word "feminist" to mean "filthy godless pinko commie liberal baby-killing anti-American" (where "liberal" has already been redefined) or some other such politically charged interpretation. That's a fantastic trick pulled by the anti-women (amongst other things) crowd who do wonders with redefining language on a daily basis.