Claims of sex discrimination in individual cases generally require the complainant to identify a male in a similar situation who received better treatment. As academic employment opportunites decrease, such identifications become increasingly problematic. Even where adverse employment decisions are obviously grounded in sex-based stereotypes, they are likely to be beyond the reach of antidiscrimination legislation. This article argues for an expansion of traditional notions of discrimination to permit antidiscrimination suits where the adverse employment decision was based on an expectation that women should conform to a certain pattern of behavior whether or not that expectation was based on hostility and whether or not there is a similarly situated male who received different treatment.