Compatability and Differences Between Cornell & Zerilli

I also struggled with these texts quite a bit because it seems like the actual theories were built on assumptions that weren't necessarily discussed or explained in the specific text. From what I understood, Zerilli and Cornell's writings built upon each other in shaping how they think women should go about retaking their collective identity. Zerilli argues that its not necessary to define a specific feminine identity because doing so would continue the overused, outdated paradigm of subject centered feminism. She thinks this is an outdated perspective because she disagrees that any subject based identity can ever wholly determine how an individual will act. It seems that Zerilli would argue that action as an expression of freedom is what collectively unites feminists and women, so any action that is an expression of desires would be deemed a step in the right direction. 

Cornell's writing reinforces this, arguing that the experience of discovering desires and acting upon them creates autonomy, which can serve to break through male-centered politics and lead to a greater freedom. It doesn't seem as if Cornell ever seems to distinguish between the individual action and collective action, where as Zerilli seems to argue that individual action builds to collective action. 

To me, freedom and autonomy seem to go hand in hand in these writings, but I wonder how the authors would actually go about defining who is a feminist and whether or not the expression of desires or freedom counts towards feminism if it is still expressed with the constraints or perspectives of a male dominated society?