Science Debunking the ‘Soy Boy’ Myth, With Science

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Link (Archive)

Debunking the ‘Soy Boy’ Myth, With Science​

In the last decade, a new pejorative has emerged for men perceived as insufficiently masculine: “soy boy.” The term implies that soy consumption “feminizes” men by altering their hormonal balance — a flatly incorrect claim rooted in a complete misunderstanding of biology. It’s worth taking some time to debunk the “soy boy” myth, as the term is both scientifically inaccurate and reinforces toxic norms about gender, race and masculinity.

The False Claims of ‘Soy Boy’ Fears​

While there’s no official definition of the term, believers of the “soy boy” archetype generally allege that eating soy does one or more of the following things:
  • Raises men’s estrogen levels
  • Lowers men’s testosterone levels
  • Causes men to experience sexual dysfunction or decreased libido
  • Increases a man’s risk of getting breast cancer
  • Causes men to grow breasts
As a result of these alleged side effects, men who eat soy effectively become emasculated, or “feminized” — so the story goes, at least. But is this really the case?

No, it isn’t. Study after study has debunked these claims. Eating soy has no effect on men’s hormone levels or sex drives, doesn’t cause men to grow breasts or experience erectile dysfunction and doesn’t decrease men’s libido. And far from promoting breast cancer, eating soy might actually decreaseone’s chances of getting certain cancers.

The Harm of the ‘Soy Boy’ Stereotype​

At a glance, “soy boy” might just seem like a silly slang term for an effeminate man. But the term is actually much more insidious than it might appear, and has several misogynistic and racist connotations.

For one, “soy boy” is never used as a compliment. It’s always meant as an insult, and specifically, as an insult toward men perceived as being insufficiently masculine, or likewise, too feminine. The term is premised on the idea that it’s bad for men to be effeminate, or that men are somehow worth less if they exhibit qualities that society perceives as “feminine.” This is a misogynistic belief, as it’s rooted in the devaluing and othering of “female” characteristics.

Racist Undertones of the ‘Soy Boy’ Insult​

“Soy boy” can also have racist undertones, for two reasons. In the West, Asian men have long been stereotyped as effeminate, unmasculine and asexual. Given that soy consumption is much higher in Asian countries, the idea that soy drinkers are puny “soy boys” only furthers this racist stereotype of Asian men.

The second reason has to do with lactose, which is present in dairy milk but not soy milk. The majority of people on the planet have trouble digesting dairy, and people of color are especially susceptible to lactose intolerance. By contrast, only about 15 percent of Caucasians are lactose-intolerant.

In other words, the majority of white people can drink dairy milk without any health complications, but the majority of people of color can’t. This makes soy milk an especially attractive proposition to people of color — which, in turn, means that men of color are disproportionately likely to be labeled “soy boys.”

There’s undoubtedly a social and political element to the “soy boy” insult. Meat-eating has long been associated with masculinity, which has led to veganism being associated with a lack of masculinity. Soy milk is popular among vegans, so it’s not surprising that some people would find a way to accuse soy-drinking men of being effeminate.

Breaking Down the Science of Soy​

The term “soy boy” isn’t just a throwaway insult; it’s also a a set of claims about soy’s effects on the male body. In order to debunk these claims, it’s necessary to dive into the science behind soy and its effect on the human body.

The Difference Between Phytoestrogen and Estrogen​

Much of the confusion around soy’s health impacts stems from the fact that it contains isoflavones, a type of phytoestrogen. Despite its name, phytoestrogen is not a type of estrogen.

Rather, phytoestrogen is a different compound that’s found in over 300 plants, including soybeans. It’s named as such because it’s structurally similar to estrogen, and can bind to the same types of neuroreceptors as estrogen.

“People may be thinking, okay, phytoestrogen, estrogen. These things are basically the same thing, right?,” Noah Praamsma, the Nutrition Education Coordinator with the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, tells Sentient. “If I eat phytoestrogens, doesnt it sort of logically follow that I’ll be taking on these female characteristics?”

It doesn’t, Praamsma says. Mountains of research has shown that consuming phytoestrogen has no effect on a person’s estrogen levels, and eating isoflavones, even in extremely high quantities, does not cause men to experience “feminization,” or take on biologically female attributes.

“It’s just really important to emphasize that phytoestrogens and isoflavones that you eat in your diet don’t actually affect the amount of estrogen that your body produces, or the amount that is circulating,” Praamsma says.

The Effect of Isoflavones​

This all isn’t to say that phytoestrogen and isoflavones have no effect on the human body at all. In sufficient doses, they’ve been shown to improve cognitive function, promote skin health, reduce cholesterol and help stave off breast cancer.

But in order to enjoy these benefits, one has to eat a lot of isoflavones — at least 50mg every day, according to one study, and potentially as high as 160mg a day, depending on the health benefit in question.

For perspective, the average Westerner consumes around 2mg of isoflavones every day; in Asia, where soy products are more of a dietary staple than in the West, the average person consumes between 15 and 50mg of isoflavones every day.

To be sure, too much of any food is a bad thing. But even the most devoted soy lovers will probably get nowhere near that tipping point. For instance, suppose a man eats an entire 100g block of tofu, and drinks 20 ounces of soy milk, every day. That’s undoubtedly a soy-heavy diet — but still comes out to only 85mg of isoflavones per day, which is well within the healthy range.

Soy Doesn’t Give Men Breasts or Erectile Dysfunction​

While study after study shows that soy doesn’t have a feminizing effect on men, proponents of the “soy boy” trope sometimes allege that eating soy can make men develop breasts, or experience erectile dysfunction. This isn’t true, but it’s helpful to look at the origins of these claims to understand why they’re not true, and what the science actually says.

In 2008, a report of a 60-year-old man who mysteriously developed gynecomastia, or enlargement of the breast tissue, received significant media attention. The man also began experiencing erectile dysfunction and a decrease in his libido around the same time as his gynecomastia symptoms, and scientists eventually traced these changes to his consumption of soy milk. When he stopped drinking soy milk, his symptoms subsided.

This single case led to a flurry of media coverage. Men’s Health ran with it, suggesting — in a lengthy article that appears to have since been deleted from its website — that soy might be “the most dangerous food for men.” Even today, mainstream publications are still debunking the “soy makes men grow boobs” myth.

The reason it’s a myth is that the man in this study was consuming an astronomical, abnormal amount of soy — around three liters of soy milk every day, he told the researchers. That comes out to over 300mg of isoflavones every 24 hours —six times higher than the highest estimate of average daily soy consumption in Asia, where soy consumption is already higher than anywhere else in the world, and over 100 times higher than the average Westerner’s daily soy consumption.

Needless to say, this man was an outlier — the study referred to him as a “very unusual case” — because most humans, male and female, don’t eat anywhere near that much soy. Drinking this much soy milk almost certainly threw this man’s entire diet out of whack, given the caloric and fat content of soy milk; in addition, there’s some indication in the study that he may have been more sensitive to isoflavones than the population at large.

Two years later, a meta-analysis of existing research found no evidence that isoflavone consumption, even when significantly higher than the average intake in Asian countries, causes men to grow breasts. In one study, 300 men ate 100mg of isoflavones every day for three years, and showed no signs of gynecomastia.

In 2018, 10 years after warning readers that soy might make them grow breasts, Men’s Health published an article touting the health benefits of soy milk.

Praamsma also traces the “soy boy” myth to a 2003 study finding that male rats experienced changes in their reproductive organs and general sexual dysfunction when fed significant amounts of genistein, a type of isoflavone, in their infancy. This finding may also have contributed to the “soy boy” trope — but it shouldn’t, Praamsma stresses, because the results of studies involving non-humans often can’t be extrapolated to humans.

“There’s a sort of flawed logic in assuming that everything that happens in a rodent is therefore a predictor of what happens in humans,” Praamsma explains. “That’s just not the case.”

Indeed, later research found several biological reasons why rodents’ reactions to isoflavones don’t necessarily apply to humans. Even the press release announcing the 2003 study acknowledges this, saying at the outset that “these findings do not indicate that genistein has a similar effect in humans.”

Soy Doesn’t Cause Breast Cancer — But It Might Help Prevent It​

It’s been claimed that drinking soy milk increases a man’s chance of getting breast cancer. This is also false, and is based on a misunderstanding of how estrogen and phytoestrogen work.

There are two different mechanisms by which the brain receives and processes estrogen: alpha receptors and beta receptors. Alpha receptors increase the speed at which cells divide, and they’re the primary receptors to which estrogen bonds. As a result, elevated estrogen levels can lead to runaway cell growth and, potentially, cancer.

But beta receptors have the opposite effect: they inhibit cell growth. And it just so happens that phytoestrogen bonds primarily to beta receptors, not alpha receptors. The result is that the isoflavones in soy, far from promoting breast cancer, can actually reduce one’s risk of getting breast cancer.

The Bottom Line​

It’s beyond time that we ditch the “soy boy” stereotype, and the counterproductive beliefs about masculinity, race and nutrition that fuel it. The science is clear: soy doesn’t alter men’s hormones, or otherwise emasculate them. In reality, soy milk is a healthy, affordable and sustainable alternative to dairy milk for men and women alike.
 
If it's not the soy then why exactly have they turned into walking vaginas?
 
This right here embodies what I believe is literally the worst thing about modern left-wing politics. The demonization of strength and the promotion and worship of weakness is the true defining trait of these types.

Wanting strength but not having it is one thing but this is just plain awful.
 
This is all cope. Phytoestrogens trigger the same receptors as estrogens, and while they might activate a different pathway, to some degree they will still stimulate the same effects.
 
The Soyence has DEBOONKED any claims that soy has adverse effects on your health. Now drink up your Soylent, goy!
The term is premised on the idea that it’s bad for men to be effeminate, or that men are somehow worth less if they exhibit qualities that society perceives as “feminine.” This is a misogynistic belief, as it’s rooted in the devaluing and othering of “female” characteristics.
Yes, it does make them worth less you soy-sick faggot. Men are biologically masculine. Remove that, and they are cowards who would cower behind other people rather than protect them. I’d go so far as to say it’s evil.
 
Last edited:
This is all cope. Phytoestrogens trigger the same receptors as estrogens, and while they might activate a different pathway, to some degree they will still stimulate the same effects.
On a side note, the IFLS crowd conveniently ignores any actual science that doesn't coincide with their garbage ideology.
If it's not the soy then why exactly have they turned into walking vaginas?
I can't wait for the next article in the series where they promote the merits of simping.
 
I am nowhere near qualified to discuss Japanese diets through their recorded history. But going by the west's known history, yes vegetables and plants were more common with the lower castes; but also, Japan is an island nation, and the sea provides. What I will say with confidence, is the west processes shit differently and adds God knows what else in it; compare USA products to their EU counterparts and shudder in horror. Now apply the comparison to Natto / fermented soy, you know the USA isn't being honest about the shit the FDA signa off on.
The fact that I have to check the ingredient label of everything I buy to make sure there’s not some poison in it and the fact that there’s literal industrial waste in our drinking water is fucking horrifying. The US food industry is corrupt to its core.
 
I do not believe this, mostly because I and a couple other women I know are sensitive to too much tofu.

Did an experiment at one point to see if it was the tofu and ate a pound a day for a week- my face was so broken out around the chin/mouth area and generally that only happens once a month naturally.

Love tofu, but eating a lot of it isn’t good for people.
Same with soy milk etc.
If it gives women hormonal breakouts idk what it does to men, but I’m sure it’s something.
 
LMAO, don't try to convince me, convince your own lefty troons, they're soymaxxing every possible estrogenic alternative in an attempt to speedrun their gyno.
 
I remember a similar (???) article being posted maybe a year ago... I looked at it because I don't care if I'm wrong, I'm glad to see SCIENCE and maybe change my opinion based on the facts. Whether or not it was the same article and/or studies, I seem to recall skimming the info and deciding that it wasn't very conclusive, too many holes and not enough specifics- in other words, no change, stick with logic and empiricism.

Is this one any better? They keep saying there's 50,000 stoodies proving how good it is, or more accurately, how not bad it is. I don't feel like looking at all these poorly designed shitstudies again. Someone should pick a half dozen and deboonk/look for holes.

Nobody thinks phytoestrogen is functional fucking estrogen. But it literally triggers some of the same receptor sites. IIRC the studies are light on the details, like "oh these people ate X amount for Y time and did not grow tits". OK, cool, but what about markers other than actual gyno? What about confounding factors like a population that already has bottomed-out testosterone levels? If your T levels are already in the trash, then I doubt any amount of shitty diet is gonna lower them significantly.

Other factors can and do decrease T (or raise E). It would be nice to get real data on soy, maybe using bodybuilders or something, or even exogenous test/supplementation, and not just bias deboonks. These people actually want you to believe that in their vast brilliant research, the only thing they found out was that soy consumption has massive benefits. No downsides. Does ANYTHING in nature work like that?
 
1623193989208-png.2244560
 
Yes, it does make them worth less you soy-sick faggot. Men are biologically masculine. Remove that, and they are cowards who would cower behind other people rather than protect them. I’d go so far as to say it’s evil.
To be fair, he only speaks of what he knows. Jewish "men" are biologically weak and do indeed cower behind every single other person when it comes to a fight. This is just a natural state of being for soyberg the science deboonker soyjak here.
 
I just don't like the texture. If I'm eating vegetarian give me some paneer or something.

Anyway, this is the doctor.

Noah Praamsma, MS, RDN 2_0.jpg

In my brief research looking for reason to mock his unfortunate hairline I came across this article talking about how soy may prevent/reduce male pattern baldness by fucking with test being converted into dht


I don't care. I'll shave my head if I go bald, fuck it. Soy as far as I'm concerned falls in to the seed oil category, it doesn't really matter if it's a meme that it's bad for you, there's plenty of alternatives unless you're a vegetarian faggot, so why risk it?

Plus, it winds people up no end
 
Meanwhile, doctors are increasingly likely to prescribe soy consumption as an alternative to hormone replacement therapy for post-menopausal women. There's tons of research going on to see how much benefit they can wring out of soy isoflavones for older women, since HRT increases breast cancer rates.
 
"soy boy myth deboonked!"

"last 10 years"
shhh nobody tell them it was a meme/sereotype since the 2000s before the soyjak even existed. Still getting obnoxious video essay people who think someone was "ahead of their time" or "started it" when they see it referenced in shit from before the last 4 years.
Also it predated soylent but once soylent existed that became the prime soyboy drink. Actually forgot this till someone pointed it out a few months ago but the term actually originated/was popularized from a tofu brand that still exists to this day.

The term “soy boy” isn’t just a throwaway insult; it’s also a a set of claims about soy’s effects on the male body. In order to debunk these claims, it’s necessary to dive into the science behind soy and its effect on the human body.
It's not a set of claims about soy's effects though certain things in soy can do that to certain people or cause allergic reactions if someone's allergic to soybeans. It's a specific stereotype tied to pretentious fuckers that write articles like this lmao. Something tells me they actually understand this and are just feigning ignorance to deflect to "THE SCIENCE!!!"

I called a guy a faggot once and he was like "debunked! checkmate motherfucker, I've never even had sex!"
Honestly a pretty funny/good comeback against being called a faggot while being a virgin.
 
The problem being, the soy we get in the west is often compared to fermented soy / natto you get in places like Japan;
I agree with this, the way the American food industry uses soy beans is broken and misguided. It's not respected as its own thing and often used for "imitation" food products or hyper processed foods/filler/soybean oil.

Natto is awesome and besides it being great for gut health it just tastes good. I usually put it in my French style scrambled eggs or on my rice, and it also tastes good mixed in vanilla ice-cream for some reason, lol.

Also, I like to make my own tofu. I like to drink the leftover whey or use it in my bread, and I make unohana or okara flour with the left over pulp. Fresh tofu is much much better than the store bought, it's even faintly sweet on the tongue.
 
Wow, this soy boy had to shit out a wall of text just to say he is a weak faggot.
 
Back
Top Bottom