They're like that

Fake Family

1. “This guy is being a creep and won’t leave me alone. Will you pretend to be my overprotective older brother for five minutes?”

2. “The nurse said only family was allowed back here, so I told her we were siblings. Just go along with it.”

3. “That person asked if I was your S/O. I’m sick of people not believing when I say we’re friends, so I said we were siblings.”

4. “I’m your bodyguard, but the event you’re going to does not allow bodyguards, so I’m now your sibling.”

5. “I was on a date, and the person made me uncomfortable, so I told them my parent was a cop. Only problem: My parents are dead, and you’re the only cop I know. Help?”

6. “We have a very elaborate story of how we’re related that we tell everyone when they meet us. No one has any idea that it isn’t true.” 

7. “I told someone we were siblings, but we look nothing alike, so you said I was adopted. Now they want to have dinner with my family… Are your parents good at lying?”

8. “We always joke that we’re siblings, but someone didn’t realize we were joking, so now we’re seeing how far we can carry this out.”

9. “Our organization is extremely covert, but your friends have caught me at your place a few times picking you up. I just found out that you’ve been telling them I’m your hysterical aunt who calls you every time she has a new heartbreak. Really? You couldn’t come up with a less embarrassing cover?” 

what is gender neutrality?

names and titles

specific and neutral pronouns

how to write with neutral terms

more neutral writing

use this instead of that

how to use common neutral pronouns

It depends on which system of ranking you use, of course (there are several), but in most systems there’s actually a rule covering this scenario: in the event that a consort’s courtesy title being of the same rank as their spouse’s would potentially create confusion over who holds the title by right and who by courtesy, the consort instead receives the next-highest title on the ladder.

So the husband of a prince would be a duke; the wife of a queen, a princess; and so forth.

(You actually see this rule in practice in the United Kingdom, albeit not in the context of a same-sex marriage; the Queen’s husband is styled a prince because if he were a king, folks might get confused about which of them was the reigning monarch.)

The only common situation where you’d expect to see, for example, two queens in the same marriage is if the reigning monarchs of two different realms married each other - and even then, you’d more likely end up with a complicated arrangement where each party is technically a princess of the other’s realm in addition to being queen of her own.

1. The system described above is, admittedly, merely one of the most common. Other historically popular alternatives include:

The consort’s courtesy title is of the same rank as their spouse’s, with “-consort” appended to it: prince and prince-consort, queen and queen-consort, etc. This is how, e.g., present-day Monaco does it.

The consort is simply styled Lord or Lady So-and-so, and receives no specific title. I can’t think of any country that still does it this way, off the top of my head, but historically it was a thing.

(Naturally, your setting needn’t adhere to any of these, but it would be highly irregular for it to lack some mechanism for clarifying the chain of command.)

2. The reason why the consort of a prince is historically a princess even though those titles are the same rank is basically sexism. This can go a couple of ways:

In many realms, there was no such thing as being a princess by right; the daughter of a monarch would be styled Lady So-and-so and receive no specific title, so the only way to be a princess was to marry a prince.

In realms where women could hold titles by right, typically a masculine title was informally presumed to outrank its feminine counterpart. So, e.g., kings outrank queens, princes outrank princesses, etc.

In either case, no ambiguity exists.

(Interestingly, this suggests that in a more egalitarian setting where masculine titles are not presumed to outrank their feminine counterparts, or vice versa, you’d need to explicitly disambiguate rankings even outside the context of same-sex marriages. Food for thought!)

3. It would also be possible to have two kings or two queens in the same marriage without multiple realms being involved in the case of a true co-monarchy. However, true co-monarchies are highly irregular and, from a political standpoint, immensely complicated affairs. If you’re planning on writing one of those, be prepared to do your research!

4. The next rank down from “countess” is either “viscountess” or “baroness”, depending on which peerage system you’re using.