I was told by my obstetrician that giving my son infant formula based on soy would be the equivalent of giving him 6 birth control pills a day due to the very high concentrations of phytoestrogens it contained. We may not be what we eat, but it seems to have an impact, at least.

I didn't coin the term soyboy, and given the common observation of the synchronicity between male feminists and soy products, it is a convenient appellation to differentiate between populations of men based on their apparent testosterone levels. Again, common assumptions are that there are synchronicities between testosterone levels and political affiliation. This may or may not be scientifically accurate, but it is at least ontologically consistent.

That being said, it wasn't my intention to cast aspersions, despite that I may do so simply out of attempts to limit my verbosity - which is sadly in evidence here!

Phytoestrogens (and soy is one of the primary sources in Western diets) are frequently cited as contributing to the emasculation of Western men, along with plastics, legacy birth control and other chemicals and drugs polluting our environment.

It is why I avoid soy.

Sadly, we have very little definitive research on which to base our understanding of the issue. Worse, the politicizing of science forces us to consider research - particularly on this inflammatory issue - with jaundiced eyes. It is amost as important to know where the funding for research came from nowadays as it is to know what the papers report.

"The family unit is under attack, and changing men and women are key to making a populace more dependent on the state and society."

On this we agree completely. I note we also seem to be in complete agreement that present changes are going in the wrong direction, and producing results opposed to what we believe are desirable.

Thanks!