Social egalitarians argue that equality should be understood in ‘social’ or ‘relational’ terms. They claim the most deeply objectionable forms of inequality involve social hierarchy, as exemplified by slavery, patriarchy, and other pernicious divisions of class or caste. The goal of egalitarianism is to replace hierarchy with relations of equality. Social egalitarians worry that contemporary political philosophy has lost sight of this goal. They contrast their view with the ‘distributive’ paradigm, according to which the theory of equality is a matter of specifying which good or set of goods—i.e. resources, welfare, primary goods, or capabilities—should be distributed equally.  It is unclear, however, whether and in what sense these two views are distinct. In this paper, I argue social egalitarianism is distinct because it is concerned with what I call a 'position-defined' good.