This essay argues that the concept of ambivalence could be leveraged as a feminist project with specific epistemological value for scholars across the humanities and social sciences. Curating its recent appearance across several areas of study, we suggest the potential of ambivalence as a feminist analytic. We argue that this analytic may help feminist scholars understand the complexity of texts, people, and social circumstances-both past and present-because it offers a conceptual category that holds space for conflicting emotions, contending historical phenomena, and overlapping affective, ethical, and political commitments. We see unique value for feminist scholarship when ambivalence is foregrounded; it asks us to consider important tensions and binaries between subjection and liberation, certainty and uncertainty, and skepticism and conviction. Reconceptualizing ambivalence as a capacity and structural condition (rather than an individual deficiency or failing), we render this concept legible for feminists across various fields and disciplines. We propose three principles that could guide its uptake in scholarship: troubling the subjection/liberation binary, elevating the value of uncertainty, and encouraging constructive ambivalence in the researcher themself. While mindful of the risks and limits of ambivalence, we encourage others to adopt ambivalence as an analytic in their own work, describing the specific gains to be had in affectively and epistemologically sitting with the contradictions and discomforts it reveals.