In "A Reader's Companion to Women's History", the liberal feminists among the book's editors so disagreed with the definition of feminism that Smith and Mink had written in an early chapter, that they (Steinem, Navarro, and Mankiller) collectively co-authored an essay that responds to it.
But for what it's worth, here are those two definitions of feminism:
Steinem et al.:
"The belief in full economic political and social equality of males and females . . . usually seen as a modern movement to transform the male-dominant past and create an egalitarian future. On this and other continents, however, feminism is also history and even memory"
Smith and Mink:
"Feminism articulates political opposition to the subordination of women as women, whether that subordination is ascribed by law, imposed by social convention, or inflicted by individual men and women. Feminism also offers alternatives to existing unequal relations of gender power, and these alternatives have formed the agenda for feminism movements"Me, I'm a bit of both, but leaning more to the second.
Yeah, like you thought feminists would agree what feminism is - we don't even agree what a 'woman' fucking is.