"They're Like Brother and Sister": The Incest-ing and Anti-Shipping of Non-Siblings
One of the movie/TV reaction channels I've been watching is making their way through The West Wing and, as we've gotten further into the fourth season, the reactors are starting to realize that Josh and Donna are probably going to be a Thing. I'll leave aside the fact that they're a bit late to the party (Joey Lucas is shipping them way back in season 2) and focus on what they (and a few frequent commenters) have said more than once -- that they can't see the romance because they've only ever seen Josh and Donna's relationship as akin to that of an elder brother and younger sister. Commenters who likewise "can't see it" -- despite having seen the whole show multiple times and knowing that it definitely Goes There eventually -- say the same.
I remember some similar arguments from back in Ye Olde Shippe Debayte days in the Potter fandom, and it occurred to me how extremely useless I find the phrase "like brother and sister" or "like incest" when it's used about characters who are not actually related to one another. I think if you could scour through the (now tragically disappeared) forums on which I used to debate, or even my old LJ posts, I'll bet I never used "they're like siblings" as an argument against Harry/Hermione. I seem to recall a lot of talk about Hermione "mothering" Harry, but that was never (to my recollection) used as an argument against them getting together either (just that the mothering itself was not romantic, which the H/Hers that we used to debate found difficult to grasp).
Josh and Donna isn't quite the same as Harry and Hermione (I mean, they're obviously not, because Josh/Donna eventually became canon *taps GLOAT button*). Because while there was nothing in the way of Harry and Hermione getting together -- except a simple lack of attraction from either side, which there was nothing wrong with -- there *is* an obstacle to Josh and Donna being together in that way. He's her boss and it would be inappropriate. It's significant enough of a no-go to Josh that it's the only answer he gives Amy Gardner when she asks if he's dating his assistant. And once that obstacle no longer exists, there's another one to take its place -- their working on opposing presidential campaigns and the complicated new politics (if you'll forgive the pun) of their relationship. There's no squick there, ever, and anyone who has only ever seen a sibling-like relationship between them (even before their celebratory kiss in "The Cold") is just not paying attention.
Just like with Ron and Hermione (who I recall H/Hers definitely compared to siblings), there are obviously behaviors with Josh and Donna that resemble how siblings or other family act with one another, but there are also definitely behaviors that are incompatible with a merely familial relationship. (See also Emma Woodhouse and George Knightley.) Hermione getting disproportionately upset that Ron is only interested in asking good-looking girls to the Yule Ball. Ron's jealousy of Viktor Krum -- even after Krum has left the country. Josh staring at Donna from the Mess as she walks back to her desk, only looking back at the Congressman he's meeting with when she's fully out of sight (season 2's "The Portland Trip"). "If you were in an accident, I wouldn't stop for red lights" -- that might be *true* for a sibling, but it seems a rather intense way to put it. Heck, even Colin (Jason Isaacs) in season 6 can sense he's third-wheeling it and comments insightfully on Josh's dramatic transatlantic dash to Donna's side.
I also find it amusing that, once Harry starts to feel things for Ginny in Book 6, he tries to convince himself that his anger at Dean Thomas is purely elder brotherly protectiveness. Like with Knightley, familial concern is an excellent cover for romantic jealousy. The reader, of course, knows better, and it's why, when he tells Ron in Book 7 that his feelings for Hermione are like a brother for a sister, we believe him (provided we're not smoking crax) because we've seen their interactions and even been inside Harry's head and his respective responses to Hermione and Ginny are clearly distinct from one another.
I just feel like, when people say a man and a woman (or boy and girl) are "like brother and sister," it really just means that person really doesn't want those characters to be romantic and can't find another argument to use against it.
In any case, there are surely countless romantic couples in real life who started out as platonic friends or "like brother and sister." If they were really brother and sister, that would never change. But feelings and relationships do change. People grow and change. And for non-siblings, including fictional ones, being sibling-like can change as well, especially as it's not an actual obstacle in the first place.
I remember some similar arguments from back in Ye Olde Shippe Debayte days in the Potter fandom, and it occurred to me how extremely useless I find the phrase "like brother and sister" or "like incest" when it's used about characters who are not actually related to one another. I think if you could scour through the (now tragically disappeared) forums on which I used to debate, or even my old LJ posts, I'll bet I never used "they're like siblings" as an argument against Harry/Hermione. I seem to recall a lot of talk about Hermione "mothering" Harry, but that was never (to my recollection) used as an argument against them getting together either (just that the mothering itself was not romantic, which the H/Hers that we used to debate found difficult to grasp).
Josh and Donna isn't quite the same as Harry and Hermione (I mean, they're obviously not, because Josh/Donna eventually became canon *taps GLOAT button*). Because while there was nothing in the way of Harry and Hermione getting together -- except a simple lack of attraction from either side, which there was nothing wrong with -- there *is* an obstacle to Josh and Donna being together in that way. He's her boss and it would be inappropriate. It's significant enough of a no-go to Josh that it's the only answer he gives Amy Gardner when she asks if he's dating his assistant. And once that obstacle no longer exists, there's another one to take its place -- their working on opposing presidential campaigns and the complicated new politics (if you'll forgive the pun) of their relationship. There's no squick there, ever, and anyone who has only ever seen a sibling-like relationship between them (even before their celebratory kiss in "The Cold") is just not paying attention.
Just like with Ron and Hermione (who I recall H/Hers definitely compared to siblings), there are obviously behaviors with Josh and Donna that resemble how siblings or other family act with one another, but there are also definitely behaviors that are incompatible with a merely familial relationship. (See also Emma Woodhouse and George Knightley.) Hermione getting disproportionately upset that Ron is only interested in asking good-looking girls to the Yule Ball. Ron's jealousy of Viktor Krum -- even after Krum has left the country. Josh staring at Donna from the Mess as she walks back to her desk, only looking back at the Congressman he's meeting with when she's fully out of sight (season 2's "The Portland Trip"). "If you were in an accident, I wouldn't stop for red lights" -- that might be *true* for a sibling, but it seems a rather intense way to put it. Heck, even Colin (Jason Isaacs) in season 6 can sense he's third-wheeling it and comments insightfully on Josh's dramatic transatlantic dash to Donna's side.
I also find it amusing that, once Harry starts to feel things for Ginny in Book 6, he tries to convince himself that his anger at Dean Thomas is purely elder brotherly protectiveness. Like with Knightley, familial concern is an excellent cover for romantic jealousy. The reader, of course, knows better, and it's why, when he tells Ron in Book 7 that his feelings for Hermione are like a brother for a sister, we believe him (provided we're not smoking crax) because we've seen their interactions and even been inside Harry's head and his respective responses to Hermione and Ginny are clearly distinct from one another.
I just feel like, when people say a man and a woman (or boy and girl) are "like brother and sister," it really just means that person really doesn't want those characters to be romantic and can't find another argument to use against it.
In any case, there are surely countless romantic couples in real life who started out as platonic friends or "like brother and sister." If they were really brother and sister, that would never change. But feelings and relationships do change. People grow and change. And for non-siblings, including fictional ones, being sibling-like can change as well, especially as it's not an actual obstacle in the first place.