This study critiques Butler’s theoretical model, which posits that the possibility of resistance arises from ambivalence toward power. Butler argues that ambivalence serves as a psychic marker that shapes the relationship between the subject and power. Subjects do not respond blindly to calls from power; rather, to sustain their social existence, they must inevitably subordinate themselves to it. Butler contends that subjects can cultivate a critical relationship with power through the structural ambivalence inherent in their subjection. However, when power is inscribed upon subjects through the representation of ‘the good life,’ it becomes increasingly difficult for them to maintain ambivalent feelings. ‘The good life’ represents a social ideal organized around heteronormative constructs such as family, marriage, and consumption. As Berlant notes, ‘the good life’ offers only a sense of proximity to the subject and remains an ultimately unattainable fantasy. Despite this, subjects maintain a persistent attachment to this ideal and continuously invest their personal desires in it. This study reveals how the affective relationship between power and the subject is reconceptualized as an intimate relationship among subjects. Consequently, resistance to power is often perceived as an act of betrayal that threatens the aspirations of one’s intimate others. Given this complex entanglement of power, affect, and intimacy, the study explores the nuances of power dynamics through subjects’ emotional attachment to ‘the good life.’ Power does not operate solely at the epistemological level; it manifests to subjects as a tangible reality that can be sensed and felt, particularly through the faces of intimate others. Therefore, a critical engagement with power must extend into the ontological dimension. This study advocates for broadening the understanding of power from the epistemological to the ontological register, emphasizing the subtleties of its operation.