Research on confronting prejudice frequently defines an effective confrontation as one that induces change in the perpetrator's prejudicial beliefs or actions. We argue for a broader definition, defining successful confrontation as one that elicits the confronter's desired response. Using a community sample of 152 adults, we conducted an exploratory study in which participants recalled a time when they had confronted racism or sexism. Results revealed a frequent mismatch between what confronters desired and what they received from the perpetrator. Path analysis showed that a perceived match between desired and actual perpetrator responses to confrontation predicted greater positive and lower negative emotion among confronters, across a range of perpetrator responses. We argue that researchers need to expand definitions of successful confrontation to better understand the ways in which confronters' and perpetrators' behaviors intersect within lived experiences of prejudice.