Soy Boys and Keeley

Soy Boys- based on Keeley

Result: may not be a complete conspiracy theory.

While looking that the conspiracy theory of the ‘soy boys’, I want to consider Keeley’s definition of a conspiracy theory. That of “a proposed explanation of some historical event (or events) in terms of the significant causal agency of a relatively small group of persons- the conspirators -acting in secret.” As this seems to be an ongoing event, we are looking at the recent historical instances of it. The proposed conspiracy theory seems to be three-fold. That the ingestion of soy creates lower testosterone and higher estrogen levels in men, while therefore creates a weaker and more frail male species. It also plays into a white supremacist ideal that drinking milk from a cow comes from a more ‘nordic ideal’ and that hereditary lactose-intolerance comes from those not from the ‘Nordic-Germanic’ heritage.
There seems to be no small group of people working in secret about this as a conspiracy theory. The people involved believing this information is based on ‘fake news’ and bigotry, against all manner of diverse identities. It is either straight men calling out the epidemic of the lower testosterone creating more homosexual men, or historical white political figures labelling all those of a non-white background as intellectually inferior, based on their non-consumption of cow milk products.
For one, the articles that are pro-soy boy have no corroborating evidence, although they do hand out statistics like candy. The pro-soy boy article in WND uses effective language to convince the readers that there is way too much estrogen in soy products. They use multiple ‘statistics’ that would seem true to the average reader, but they hold no additional evidence or support. The key to their success is not providing ‘unbelievable’ stats, but making them slight enough that the possibility of them getting larger could be believed. However the anti-soy boy sources actually provide medical evidence to dissuade believers of the soy boy ‘phenomenon’. The Ringer source actually provides the medical studies that looked at the effect of soy on the body, and you can see their research linked in the article.
The sources that are anti-soy boy, debating the truth of this topic have ecumenical proof that there is no correlation between soy and an increase of estrogen in male subjects. Therefore, the evidence of the pro-soy boy articles is not even contradicting an original idea, it just doesn’t exist. The ‘evidence’ they do have is contradictory in of itself. The photos used to label men as soy boys, are not relevant whatsoever. The defining aspect of these photos is the ‘soylent grin’ which is basically an open-mouthed smile of enthusiasm. Conclusion with this smile, it is an effeminate quality that has arisen based on the consumption of soy based products. One of them is even Harvey Weinstein, a man accused of a breathtaking number of sexual harassment cases by women. Other men name dropped are those of David Beckham and Justin Trudeau, both happily married to women and with many kids. Another instance, that may have had relevant evidence, is that of the Try Guys, a previously Buzzfeed comedy YouTube group, who had their testosterone tested as part of a video segment- the man with the most testosterone was Eugene, who is the only gay member of the group. The conclusion therefore that the possibility of lower testosterone levels are indicative of heterosexuality, are false.
Overall, I’m not sure that I would categorise this as a conspiracy theory. Is it based on a political agenda against left-wing male feminists? Or is it a conspiracy against the production of soy as a non-dairy alternative, created by those in charge of our dairy productions? If the most popular non-dairy substance was almond or cashew based, would those be the new ‘soy boy’ qualifiers? This makes me think that it is not a left-wing agenda, but the same agenda being used in vaping today. The reason the government cracked down so heavy when deaths rose from vaping, was to bring revenue back to the tobacco companies. In conclusion, this is not a conspiracy theory that soy milk creates impotence and effeminate men, but that soy milk is a pro-white supremacist ideology that plays against every other diverse identity. If this could be considered a conspiracy against those of diverse backgrounds and identities, than this is more embroiled in rhetoric and historical conclusions, such as the Flat Earth Society. There is no strict evidence, other than cultural habits from the past, but no longer have any reality in our today. But seeing as there is no evidence that supports this claim, there can be no errant data, and therefore no conspiracy theory of soy based estrogen change- this is not a conspiracy theory based on Keeley's definition, specifically because it does not suffice the 'relatively small group working in secret.'
The sources used for this response are the same used in the original database entry, Soy Boy Epidemic.

Sources:
Soy Boy Database entry: http://conspiracytheory.wikidot.com/wiki:soy-boy-epidemic
Keeley's Definition: http://conspiracytheory.wikidot.com/wiki:conspiracy-theory-according-to-keeley

id
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License