Differences that Matter: Feminist Theory and Postmodernism

by Sara Ahmed

Differences That Matter challenges theories of the relationship between feminism and postmodernism that ask "is/should feminism be modern or postmodern?" Pointing out how postmodernism has been allowed to dictate feminist debates, Sara Ahmed argues instead that feminism must itself ask questions of postmodernism; that feminist theorists speak (back) to postmodernism rather than simply speak on (their relationship to) it. This "speaking back" involves a refusal to position postmodernism as a generalizable condition of the world, using close readings of postmodern constructions of rights, ethics, "woman," subjectivity, authorship and film.

Genres: Feminism, Theory, Politics, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Cultural Studies, Womens

232 pages, Hardcover

First published November 25, 1994

About the author

Sara Ahmed is an independent queer feminist scholar of colour. Her work is concerned with how power is experienced and challenged in everyday life and institutional cultures. Her most recent book is No is Not a Lonely Utterance: The Art and Activism of Complaining which came out with Allen Lane in September 2025, and which is a companion text to The Feminist Killjoy Handbook which was published by Allen Lane in 2023. Previous books include Complaint! (2021), What's The Use? On the Uses of Use (2019), Living a Feminist Life (2017), Willful Subjects (2014), On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life (2012), The Promise of Happiness (2010) and Queer Phenomenology: Orientations Objects, Others all published by Duke University Press. She blogs at feministkilljoys.com and has a newsletter https://feministkilljoys.substack.com/.

Reviews

[Tara Brabazon · Rating 3 out of 5]

An evocative and engaging book that reveals the fingerprints of its time. Sara Ahmed - in the pages of this book - discloses her first engagement with postmodernism, in a classroom at the University of Adelaide in 1989. By the time this book was published - 1998 - the debates appeared tired, dull, overwrought and a bit pointless. The introduction to this book is a fine primary source for what happened to the humanities in the 1990s. Postmodernism was only really 'a thing' for a very small window of time, for a very small group of people.

There is a reason why most of the theorists described as 'postmodern' always laughed or refused the label. The complexity of that reason is not well probed in this book. It would take a new century to reflect on what had been lost in the 1990s through some pretty weird and shallow reading practices and interpretation strategies.

This book offers a great deal. The tortured introduction reminds us of the 1990s and provides an historical reminder to never commit - evangelically - to any theoretical paradigm.

The chapter on authorship is absolutely outstanding. The conclusion is provocative and powerful - welcoming a different future.

The weakest chapters are 'Screen' where we see the conventional Mulvey theorizing and - yes - textual analyses of David Lynch films. Those were the days, dear friends. There is some intriguing ideas offered through the discussions of ethics, but the research on 'postmodern jurisprudence' ignored the very powerful law in context theorizing of the time, best witnessed through the burgeoning sports law, entertainment law, and law and popular culture movements, theorists, journals and organizations. They were mobilizing - strongly - at the time this book was published.

Similarly, the actual theorizing of the 'postmodern' theorists (oh the fun - not - of using inverted commas with random flair once more!) is not deep or complex. Lyotard is well handled. Deleuze is OK. Butler is strong. But the exploration of Baudrillard - so intricate - so gutsy - is not present here. That is a shame. It would take another decade for Baudrillard to find his best interpreters. As to Virilio - he remains in his bunker - excluded once more from the 'differences that matter.' He would probably have enjoyed that...

The early signs of the Sara Ahmed we know in the 2010s is present to see in this book. A fine writer, with a finely grained eye for the interesting. But like so many, she was dragged down by the pretentions of the US-framed theorizations of postmodernism.

Reading the introduction now was incredibly uncomfortable. I don't remember feeling this discomfort when I read it at the time. But it remains a warning to us all. Academic fashions can make the best of us wear the intellectual equivalent of shoulder pads and polyester flares.

[laia polo · Rating 4 out of 5]

tant de bo se'm quedi algo de tot el que he après i reflexionat amb aquest llibre. ni que sigui un 1%.

[Guilherme Smee · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sara Ahmed é uma das grandes teóricas de gênero e do feminismo. E eu estou nessa busca de ler pelo menos um livro destas grandes pensadoras. Este livro peguei na biblioteca da UFRGS na conta, claro, do meu irmão. Neste livro a autora aborda o feminismo através das lentes do pós-modernismo. Ou seria o pós-modernismo através das lentes do feminismo? De qualquer forma é uma junção dos dois conceitos e que também esbarra na desconstrução do conceito de autoria, quando tanto a partir da visão dos dois conceitos, este é um elemento chave. A morte ou a volta do autor que o pós-modernismo prega e as dicotomias entre comunidade e individualidade também obtidas pelo mesmo são discutidas neste livro, que também discute a meta autoria, os direitos, a mulher, e tantos outros conceitos caros para estas duas acepções. Contudo, o livro é bastante enfadonho de ser lido, e quase não captura a nossa atenção. Da leva de livros que eu peguei na biblioteca da UFRGS, no final das contas, esse foi o que mais demorei para acabar. Nem tanto pelo texto ser difícil, mas por sua construção não dar muita liberdade para a imaginação e elaboração de ideais próprias.

[Rose · Rating 4 out of 5]

way more accessible than the texts it references, i feel like i finally know what postmodern means

[martina · Rating 3 out of 5]

deleuze i guattari sou els pitjors

[Ty · Rating 1 out of 5]

I think that if the author could have used worse examples and drowned her text in additional academic jargon, she would have, just to make the text less accessible and more boring.

I had to read it for class. Only bloody reason I convinced myself to keep reading about the damn male philosopher with a pen in his hand while seating at a desk finally deciding he needs a smoke.
*head -> desk*

[em petlev · Rating 3 out of 5]

to be so real i still don’t fully understand postmodernism but i don’t think that’s all on ahmed. imo the second half of the book was better than the first. content warning violence and sexual violence

[Isadora Wagner · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wasn't quite what I was looking for, but helped me think through several issues in relation to my research project.