 The tension highlighted by Spivak, in which the Western Subject constitutes both the dominant subject and the only subject capable of resistance, underlies postcolonial feminisms’ critique of the alignment of the West with modernity and progress (McClintock 1995; Stoler 1995). Chandra Talpade Mohanty, in “Under Western Eyes”, criticizes the hegemony of Western approaches in defining the scope and goals of feminist struggles. Issues such as the veil debate, in this sense, point to the political and phenomenological racialization of the Non-Western woman (Al-Saji 2010; Sheth 2006). At the same time, Uma Narayan draws attention to the risks of fetishizing the category of the Non-Western and highlights how such a fetishization remains within colonially determined divisions (Narayan 1997; Narayan &amp; Harding 2000). Namita Goswami, in Subjects That Matter, develops heterogeneity as a kind of conceptual continuity between feminism, philosophy, and postcolonial studies, which allows for an understanding of difference beyond oppositional and antagonistic terms (Goswami 2019).