The Shift: Scenes from the Year Humanity Lost Sex

by Zoe S. Figueroa

[MATT]: Yeah, I got one January 2. Did you guys not?

  [SOOVIN]: No, I’ve been holding off. I probably should; I’ve basically just been crossing my arms a bunch.

  [RYAN]: I should too, but I just know five months from now every clothing company is going to come out with their collection for everyone who used to be a guy.

  [NATALIE]: Are you seriously so insecure that you’re only going to buy women’s clothing if it’s been made for men?

  [RYAN]: I mean, first of all it’s just going to be human clothing from now on, and second of all I’m going to have to buy a whole lot of new clothes anyway and I’m going to wait until there’s more… variety. Maybe they’ll have new versions of some shirts I already like.

  [NATALIE]: To go along with your new skirts.

  [RYAN]: You know what, who the hell knows where fashion’s going to be in five months. So, what are we talking about? Horror movies? This is a horror movie podcast, right? What did you all think about that Jack Springer trailer that was released back when males existed?

  [SOOVIN]: It looked okay.

  [NATALIE]: Yeah, I thought it was promising.

  [MATT]: I’m pretty excited honestly.

  [RYAN]: Really? I wasn’t impressed.

  [LAUGHTER]

  [MATT]: Well, at least we know this goddamn podcast hasn’t changed at all.

  [END OF TRANSCRIPT SEGMENT]

  Discussion Thread Comment

  Episode 170

  Podcast “Silver Screams”

  Wednesday January 17, 16 days after

  Frixiii - 5:50PM

  Great, now I can’t tell Ryan and Natalie’s voices apart.

  Marketing Department Presentation

  Cupid’s Arrow Lingerie Headquarters

  New York, NY

  Monday February 12, 42 days after

  Since The Shift the oft-used joke has been the people most poised to profit are the lingerie companies that can now sell bras and panties to twice as many people. As it turns out, they’re only half right. Our company and companies like ours are actually poised to increase our sales by more than 100%. Not only do we have the opportunity to sell our wares to pre-shift men, but now all people need underwear for when they have penises and when they don’t.

  Pre-shift women (hereafter PSW) need at least three pairs of panties with extra room and pre-shift men (hereafter PSM) need a whole laundry cycle’s worth of both types, hopefully more. However, this need doesn’t mitigate the need to effectively market these new types of panties, nor does it remove the greatest challenge for selling them: what to call them.

  Customers entering our stores need to be able to easily find underwear that serves their needs. They need to be able to ask for and identify panties that will accommodate them when they’re presenting without embarrassment or confusion.

  Not only is it necessary to differentiate these types of bottoms, but it’s also an opportunity for our brand to put a stamp on this new category of underwear. If we really nail this our terminology could become industry standard. Customers could be asking for our varieties by name.

  Off the bat there were a number of designations that were simply unacceptable. Male and female is the most obvious. Customers do not become male or female when they grow and retract their penises, and neither PSMs nor PSWs will appreciate buying underwear labeled as intended for genders they are not or were not. More technical and vague terms like yonic/phallic or gynic/andro don’t improve the situation much. In fact, anything that references a vagina should be avoided. After all, the vagina doesn’t disappear when one presents.

  Some terms are too generic to serve as effective marketing implements. Euphemistically, usage seems to be settling around present and absent while slang seems to be trending towards packing and smooth. Both terms are descriptive, but they’re too formal and informal respectively, and would likely not qualify for a trademark. Regular and extra are perhaps more effective terms, but are still too generic to be used for marketing.

  King and queen using playing card iconography seemed promising, but former straight PSMs are tentative enough about buying panties without having to buy panties designated “for queens.”

  We considered yin and yang for a while since it’s just vague enough and the iconography is powerful, but it presents two problems. First, most people would not know which term would refer to what kind of underwear. Second, it too strongly connotes an East Asian context which could both limit stylistic choices and offend potential customers.

  Sun and moon was looking like our finalist for a while. The symbolism of the moon with the cycle of presenting was obvious and easily grasped. However, the symbolism of the sun was weak and customers might be tempted to think of either type of panty for daytime or nighttime use instead of for absent and presenting.

  Despite these shortcomings, it was looking like our best option until it hit us: animal names.

  Animals were not affected by The Shift and still retain their masculine and feminine traits while still being abstract enough that they do not read as strictly male or female in a human sense. Of course, animals are still male and female, but they are distanced enough from the cultural baggage of gender that customers can accept their masculine and feminine names without too much discomfort.

  First we had to discard anything that could be derogatory. Animals using cow, sow, or bitch were eliminated immediately. That included hen, and besides, you can imagine why we wouldn’t want our presenting underwear to be labeled cock.

  Anything that uses gendered terms and suffixes had to go as well. She-bear, Lioness, and Tigress for example.

  Ram and ewe connotated conformity too much, and mare was matched with the overly masculine stallion. Perhaps in time PSWs can stomach wearing panties that bring to mind the idiom “hung like a horse,” but we doubt that time is now.

  In the end, we thought the best animal to associate with our branding that best straddled the needs of specificity, approachability, and clarity was the doe and buck.

  Deer are common animals whose sexual dimorphism is easily recognized. However, deer themselves aren’t overtly associated with one gender. Every young child knows that dogs are boys and cats are girls, but deer present as basically neuter. Even more, they span a wide span of connotations when it comes to gender. Deer are both graceful and powerful, gentle and virile, domestic and rugged. They bring to mind animated princesses as much as they do trophy hunting. As a symbol the deer is incredibly flexible. We do not anticipate PSMs or PSWs finding the association distasteful.

  Graphically the icons to be used are obvious and intuitive. Front views of a doe and buck’s head are instantly readable. These icons can be used without supplementary explanations on advertisements, in-store signing, and merchandise tags. The antlers effectively communicate that these panties are meant to accommodate something extra without negating the presence of what’s always there.

  Antlers also have satisfying parallels with the new human sexual cycle. Just as bucks grow and shed their antlers to attract and maintain mates, humans now grow and retract penises to similar effect. There is no need or even any benefit to point out this parallel in marketing, but a subconscious connection may develop and strengthen this association with presenting underwear and bucks.

  We can even expand on our line and still stay within the deer branding. The more virile-sounding “stag” can be used for more masculine underwear or for panties catering to our more well-endowed customers. “Hart” is a more archaic term for male deer whose more feminine connotation can be used for panties for those who wish to emphasize their femininity even while presenting.

  Doe and buck panties will be sold individually, in matching pairs, and in a matching three-piece set along with a bra. After all, why let your monthly cycle interfere with matching your tops and bottoms?

  We should note that the doe and buck designations will be used only for our everyday, sport, and swimming lines. Our lingerie should not yet incorporate this new branding. Limited quantities of li
ngerie bottoms meant for use while presenting will be produced, but they should be displayed discreetly or even available only by request. We anticipate that there will be a potentially lengthy adjustment period before PSWs will be comfortable being sexy and desirable when presenting and a likely even longer period before PSMs will be comfortable wearing lingerie. However, even though we will be avoiding the doe and buck branding for lingerie, it sets an important precedent for the second wave of animal-themed designations for lingerie: vixen and reynard.

  Foxes share a desirable trait with deer in that they occupy a liminal state when it comes to gender. They are perceived as more feminine than other canines while still being more masculine than felines. The connotation of sexy and vixen is already founded, and more importantly we feel the designation vixen will be more palatable to PSMs than other similar terms. Vixen connotates a more active role than other words that were used to describe attractive women. We want to avoid terms that imply passivity as our products help PSMs become comfortable in their new bodies.

  The iconography used for vixen and reynard panties will be less obvious than our doe and buck lines, but we are confident our team of graphic artists can create symbols that will effectively communicate each variety.

  There has never been a more promising and exciting time for this company to expand our reach to new customers and to meet the new needs of our existing customers. We feel that the doe and buck branding followed eventually by the vixen and reynard branding will differentiate our brand from our competitors and serve the needs of our customers.

  Article

  Online Advice Column

  “Ms. Ella Etiquette”

  Tuesday March 1, 59 days after

  Dear Ms. Etiquette,

  I work on the floor of an arts and crafts store and often have to address customers. Before I could simply say “Excuse me, ma’am” or “Excuse me, sir” but it’s more difficult now. Due to the shop’s traditional clientele and the way we all turned out after The Shift, I tend to default to “ma’am” but I’ve been corrected a few times and one customer responded angrily.

  Is there a better way to address customers?

  Thanks,

  Pam from Boise

  Dear Pam,

  I’ll attempt answer your question quickly, but if you don’t mind I’d like to use your letter as an opportunity to springboard into the broader topic of how we address each other in our new world.

  As I see it you have two options: first, you can use context and intuition to determine how your customers would like to be addressed. If they have long hair and are wearing dresses and makeup and buying lace by the yard they were most likely not men before The Shift and if they were there’s a chance they wouldn’t mind being referred to by “ma’am.” Other cases might call for more nuance, but you can still try your best.

  The second and most likely better option is to avoid terms of address entirely. Simply saying “Excuse me” should get the right person’s attention most of the time and if not you can follow up with a descriptor like “Yes, in the red shirt” or “Yes, holding the glue gun.” Sir and ma’am in customer service contexts show a certain amount of respect but aren’t actually all that useful in clarifying who you’re talking to. I suspect most customers won’t notice you dropping it.

  Now if you don't mind indulging my musings.

  When the motley crew of Vikings and Frenchmen birthed the language that would come to be English they neglected to equip us with a set of terms flexible enough for our current predicament. We’ve attempted over time to beat our language into something more gender-neutral, but it’s an incomplete project. We have “parent” to refer to either our mother or father but no equivalent that encompasses our aunts and uncles. We can refer to our friend’s husband or wife as their spouse, but must choose between Mr. or Mrs. when writing them an invitation.

  This is a problem that’s been wrestled with by many, especially in the trans and genderqueer community. One approach has been to introduce new alternates such as “Mx.” for replacing Mr./Mrs. and “zhe” for replacing he/she.

  (As an aside, I’ve noticed proposed gender-neutral terms tend to incorporate “x” and “z” quite often. My intuition suggests it’s either because mathematically they indicate an unknown variable or such uncommon letters conjure a sense of newness.)

  Another approach has been to simply ask people their preferred terms. This tactic decentralizes commonly accepted norms in favor of personalized preferences. It’s a tiny bit more work and probably more appropriate for actual relationships instead of one-off interactions like Pam’s, but it makes absolutely sure people are referred to the way they prefer.

  Which really brings is to the entire reason we have etiquette in the first place. My manifesto has always been we have etiquette for three reasons: to make ourselves more comfortable by leaning on a set of protocols, to make others more comfortable by being considerate of their feelings, and to facilitate communication. Asking people what they’d prefer satisfies all three.

  In many cases our assumptions will simply be validated. And for those we already know most will likely retain their old preferences, even if we didn’t always think of them as preferences. This column is still “Ms. Ella Etiquette” after all. But we should all feel free to offer and accept both requests and corrections. In a way, The Shift has turned us all into doctors who now enjoy the opportunity to correct anyone who doesn’t use the proper title.

  Languages grow, and I’m convinced The Shift will cause a growth spurt. In a year we might all be going by what were once feminine forms of address or by some new, invented terms. For Pam’s sake I hope we’ll have an address that all her customers will respond to positively. Until then, it’s never rude to ask.

  Transcript of First Segment

  February 5 Episode

  TV Series “Touch ‘Em All”

  Monday February 5, 35 days after

  [MATTHEWS]: This is “Touch ‘Em All,” I’m Curtis Matthews. Today Kohler announced that it has officially suspended manufacture of all urinals. It’s the end of an era. How does that strike you Bernie?

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: I’m Bernie Schwartzman, and I’m ahead of the game. I’ve been peeing sitting down for years now. You’re all just getting on my level.

  [THEME MUSIC STARTS]

  [MATTHEWS]: Seriously man, for years?

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: Never once had to clean up any spills.

  [MATTHEWS]: Someone ought to take away your man card.

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: It’s a little late for that I’d say.

  [MATTHEWS]: Maybe they can bring back the old trough urinals. We could probably still use those, right?

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: Just come over to old Wrigley Stadium and use them.

  [MATTHEWS]: Then I’d have to set foot in Wrigley.

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: True enough.

  [THEME MUSIC ENDS]

  [MATTHEWS]: Hey kids, you’re watching “Touch ‘Em All.” Today we’re going to talk WNBA/NBA merger rumors, the impending start of the Winter Olympics, and some contested world records in swimming, but first the results of this weekend’s NFL conference title games. On Saturday, the Buffalo Bills defeated the Chiefs in Kansas City to take the AFC title and last night Atlanta ran all over the Carolina Panthers to secure the NFC. The matchup is an unlikely one, and not only because Matt Ryan looks like Jennifer Lawrence now.

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: It’s uncanny.

  [MATTHEWS]: The playoffs were already delayed two weeks by The Shift, and it seems like teams were still playing themselves into shape this weekend. Bernie: Do you think the right teams are in the Super Bowl, and what do you make up this matchup?

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: If we’re looking at the course of the season, then no, the two best teams didn’t make it. The Falcons and Bills were each the last Wild Cards in their conferences and no one would have picked them to make it this far. But: it just so happened both teams have great running games. The whole regular season was conducted when the NFL was a passing le
ague, but come January 1 Aaron Rodgers’ arm doesn’t mean so much anymore. Quarterbacks aren’t throwing nearly as far and receivers aren’t jumping nearly as high, but offensive linemen are still blocking as well and running backs are almost as fast. It’s flipped the whole league on its head.

  [CONT’D]: Devonta Freeman and LeSean McCoy were already the most valuable players on their team and they’ve only gotten more valuable in the playoffs. Even Reggie Bush has regained the slipperiness of his USC days and has become the Bills’ second-biggest offensive threat. Somehow these two teams were constructed to be the best in the NFL if every player was basically a woman. It’s an unconventional way for a GM to construct a team, but it happened to work out.

  [MATTHEWS]: There were a lot of people who wondered if the NFL should have cancelled the postseason, and this season will probably always have an asterisk attached to it. Frankly the football hasn’t been that great and that’s not just because of what happened to the players. There’s been a lot of distractions and I’m sure the football will get better next year when coaches and players adjust to what they’re capable of.

  [SCHWARTZMAN]: How much do you think the NFL is going to let that happen naturally? The league never misses an opportunity to change its rules and this is the greatest opportunity they’ve ever had. Maybe we’ll finally see the drastic, safety-minded changes people have always promoted like eliminating kickoffs or instituting weight limits.

  [MATTHEWS]: The NFL would be foolish to pass up this opportunity to make football safer. The record books will have to be reset anyway, so there’s no point in appealing to the continuity of the game. I say everything is on the table: eliminating plastic on helmets and shoulder pads, penalties for tackling without using arms or for leading with the head. We could make all linemen eligible receivers or even a move to 12-minute quarters. Hell, maybe we go nine a side. Maybe we eliminate kicking entirely; you get four downs to go 10 yards and touchdowns are worth a point. Everything’s worth considering.