Research on category formation has examined the double-edged sword of oppositional category positioning. In this study, I explore how hybrid category positioning, the intersection between oppositional and aligned positioning, may shield against risks of pure oppositionality. Using archival data from the market for Plant-Based Meat Alternatives in the US between 2011 and 2020, I developed a theory on the strategic opportunities of oppositional positioning to problematize moral components of established categories while simultaneously building moral distance from it. However, this strategy is strengthened with aligned positioning to conform to the established category's prototypicality. To illustrate this, based on empirical cases, I propose four mechanisms enabling the positioning of Plant-Based Meat. First, the problematization of the established meat category in terms of its detrimental effects related to carbon footprint and climate change. Second, the differentiation of the alternatives as a new product category with excellent moral value, emphasizing animal welfare, climate change, and human health. Third, the imitation of the prototypical attributes of the established meat category, focusing on texture, taste, and prototypes. Fourth, the contestation of the alternatives by questioning their processed nature and attempting to ban the category’s label. This case allows us to investigate the benefits of hybrid category positioning.