To say "A real fan would stay until the end instead of leaving the stadium when the rain begins to fall" is a fallacy because it defines as a real fan a person who stays until the end while it ignores that some of those who left might be devoted to the team, but diabetic and ill suited to exposure to cold, and that some of the people who stayed might be totally ignorant of the sport but merely accompanying a spouse who is a real fan.

But if I said "A real duck has feathers" and you squealed "No True Scotsman!" you would miss the mark because there are no ducks with fur or scales. Feathers are the actual definition of a duck.

Likewise, if I said "A real Muslim believes Mohammed was God's prophet," it is not a fallacy because that's what a Muslim is.

While leakythoughts is incorrect because no feminists believe in equality, it is not a No True Scotsman fallacy because belief in equality falls under leakythoughts' definition of feminism. So your argument should be directed toward the definition of "feminist" (which is: a person who seeks to preserve and extend pussy privilege), not whether leakythoughts incorrectly parsed persons into or out of the class.