Over the years neoliberal ideology and discourse have become intricately connected to making science people. Science educators work within a complicated paradox where they are obligated to meet neoliberal demands that reinscribe dominant, hegemonic assumptions for producing a scientific workforce. Whether it is the discourse of school science, processes of being a scientist, or definitions of science particular subjects are made intelligible as others are made unintelligible. This paper resides within the messy entanglements of feminist poststructural and new materialist perspectives to provoke spaces where science educators might enact ethicopolitical hesitations. By turning to and living in theory, the un/making of certain kinds of science people reveals material effects and affects. Practicing ethicopolitical hesitations prompt science educators to consider beginning their work from ontological assumptions that begin with abundance rather than lack. [This review essay addresses issues raised in Shelley Stromholt and Philip Bell's paper entitled: "Designing for Expansive Science Learning and Identification across Settings" (EJ1197619).]