From Ozempic to Emily in Paris: How Thinness Culture Undermines Feminist Progress
Thinness remains the patriarchy's favorite weapon. Society does not need to revoke women's rights directly. It simply saps their energy through constant body scrutiny. Censoring women's thoughts becomes unnecessary when they stay preoccupied with their own image. A woman worrying about weight gain cannot focus on capital gains. A woman battling her thighs and abs cannot fight to break glass ceilings.
The Shrinking of Women in the Spotlight
Melissa McCarthy appeared at the Golden Globes nearly 100 pounds lighter. She was once the poster girl for "big" stardom. Emily, played by Lily Collins, navigates Paris and Rome in the series Emily in Paris. She does so without gaining a single love handle. Body positivity champions like Kusha Kapila and Amy Schumer have transformed. They now sport Size 6 bodies.
Ariana Grande's role in Wicked sparked intense discussion. People focused not on her craft but on her rapidly shrinking frame. Many expressed genuine concern for her health. Women are visibly shrinking at a rapid pace. The body-positivity movement of the past decade now feels like a distant illusion.
The Forces Behind the Shrinkage
Drugs like Ozempic and Mounjaro drive some of this drastic change. These GLP-1 generics promise quick weight loss. However, the shrinking phenomenon is not merely pharmaceutical. It is deeply sociological. History shows a clear pattern. When women's movements gain momentum, society intervenes. It starves women, literally and metaphorically. Reducing their physical size often precedes policing their ambitions and achievements.
This argument is central to feminist theory. Yet it has largely vanished from mainstream discourse about diets and desires. The wellness-beauty-pharma industry thrives. It feeds relentlessly on women's anxieties about their bodies.
Who Truly Benefits from Thinness?
Consider the beneficiaries. Who gains when women become too thin, too exhausted, and too distracted? Who profits when women discipline their bodies obsessively? The same institutions that keep women busy on the weighing scale benefit. These women become too busy to weigh their life options. They grow too exhausted to voice strong opinions.
Look at events like the Golden Globes or lavish Indian weddings. The women present a uniform image. They are thin, or striving desperately to be thin. Their hair is perfectly blown. Their faces show signs of Botox. Their bodies are disciplined into strict compliance. The methods vary—Spanx, Pilates, strict diets, or drugs. The end goal remains the same: a body of desirous proportion.
Now observe the men at these events. They often have protruding stomachs and poor posture. Their faces suggest they never wonder if carbs are "worth it." They radiate a distinct confidence. These men know the world will not judge them by their belly size. Society will judge them by their bank balance depth or their professional position. Many of them hold the money and power.
Normalization Through Media and Influence
Shows like Emily in Paris play a specific role. So do influencers like Schumer and Kapila, who once championed body positivity. Their participation normalizes a quiet erasure. The system operates with clever subtlety. It does not cancel women who critique it outright. Instead, it styles them. It places them on strict diet and exercise regimens. It labels this process as "growth."
Thinness becomes equated with capability. Thin equals desirable. Thin means deserving of a beautiful life in Paris or Rome. Emily in Paris is less about a fashion fantasy escape. It is more about escaping what women perceive as an ugly reality.
The Ripple Effect on Minds and Society
As bodies shrink, minds often shrink too. This fuels conservatism in politics and increased control in culture. The "trad wife" aesthetic rises in popularity. Girls who can afford it marry earlier. Careers are postponed; family is prioritized first. The patriarchy quietly restores its balance.
This is not a grand male conspiracy. It is a systemic check and balance. A thin woman is often viewed as a more manageable woman. A woman chasing thinness is not chasing systemic change. This system, designed largely by men, operates with chilling efficiency.
What If Women Stopped Shrinking?
Imagine a different path. What if women stopped shrinking? Not just through Instagram affirmations and pink-themed slogans. What if they recognized body obsession as a distraction technology? What if extreme thinness was seen not as an aesthetic choice, but as a cultural warning sign?
The truth is simple yet inconvenient. Empowered women naturally take up space. The patriarchy responds by asking them to give that space back. Weight loss itself is not a moral failure. However, context matters profoundly.
Kusha Kapila's transformation into a sleeker, brand-aligned version of herself is telling. It is less a personal contradiction and more a cultural inevitability. When even the loudest critics of thinness culture begin to conform, the pressure is undeniably systemic.
The Medical Undoing of Feminist Progress
Feminist progress is being undone medically, one injection at a time. The public conversation has shifted cleverly. It now frames the issue as "taking control of your health." In the quest for physical health, mental health often realigns. It starts to comply with society's demanding standards.
So much of our beauty standards revolve around containing women. A shrinking woman feels reassuring to many men. She becomes more of a trophy than an equal partner. This cycle repeats itself at historical intervals.
The impulse to get thin and stay thin may feel instinctive. But we must read the room carefully. Look at the boardrooms. See who gets to be in them and why. When women lose weight, they often lose so much more. Sometimes the patriarchy does not use force to halt women's progress. It simply uses the lack of food.
