Throughout history, control over women’s bodies has been a mechanism of control over women’s roles. Whether through restrictive clothing, limited access to nutrition, or rigid expectations of appearance, the pattern is consistent: constrain the body, and you constrain the person. Today’s diet culture, often marketed through the language of wellness, can replicate this dynamic in subtler ways. The pursuit of thinness becomes a socially rewarded form of self-restriction.
Throughout the ascendant rise of GLP-1 drugs, including Ozempic, Wegovy, and Zepbound, brands have largely forgone targeting a specific gender. But when these drugs are marketed by gender, 95.6% of ads are targeted towards women. Direct advertisement may refrain from gender marketing, but societal expectations that market thinness towards women have escalated alongside the availability of GLP-1s. Thinness as an ideal is not fundamentally damaging, but prioritizing thinness above overall health is. Such social expectations are preying on a population to the bone, both metaphorically and physically. Consequently, what do we risk as a society by restricting the intellectual and career development of women through undernourishment and targeted drug usage linked to decreased motivation?
For years, women have worked to cement their place and their rights in a society built upon a foundation of patriarchy. These rights are still questioned by some today, proving there is still a fight for women’s rights. Simultaneously, modern beauty standards continue to glorify thinness over strength and overall health and wellness, reducing the overall physical and intellectual capacity of women. Without food, the brain slows, energy diminishes, and focus fragments. In short, restriction erodes ability and growth. In extreme cases of food restriction, anorexia nervosa has the highest mortality rate of any mental disorder.
GLP-1s are not inherently bad or associated with disordered eating. GLP-1 agonists work by mimicking the naturally occurring GLP-1 hormone produced in the small intestine. It triggers insulin release in the pancreas, slows digestion, increases the brain’s feeling of satiation, and blocks glucagon secretion, which works to effectively lower blood sugar. GLP-1s were not developed to prey upon a vulnerable population, but rather to treat Type 2 diabetes and obesity in the United States; two health epidemics that have broadly impaired the health of millions of Americans. Over 40% of Americans are considered obese, and 12% of Americans are living with Type 2 diabetes. These conditions diminish quality of life, are often linked to subsequent health issues, and shorten overall life expectancy. While there is a valid criticism that GLP-1s fail to target the root of obesity and type 2 diabetes, GLP-1s’ ability to address these health concerns is nothing short of lifesaving. However, these drugs do not exist in a vacuum; rather, the influence of social pressures guides their role.
The line between medical treatments and socially derived emaciation has begun to blur. While ideals of thinness are frequently framed as aspirational by social media and the beauty industry, they can also function as a limitation. A woman preoccupied with shrinking her body is, by necessity, diverting time, energy, and mental bandwidth away from other pursuits such as intellectual growth, career advancement, creativity, leadership, high-level athletics, and motherhood. The phrase “to break the glass ceiling” is a metaphor coined in the late 1970’s feminist movement, meaning to overcome invisible, systemic barriers. Breaking glass ceilings requires women to be in positions of leadership and authority. In a world where women already must go above and beyond to resist structural barriers encouraging mediocracy, the act of undernourishment is an additional handicap.
GLP-1s in particular target the brain’s dopamine reward system. GLP-1s are being researched to treat addiction beyond obesity, as the drug alters the brain’s reward system through lowered rates of dopamine release in response to rewards like food, alcohol, sex, or shopping. By influencing the release of dopamine, it can dampen motivation and, therefore, potentially treat addiction, but it may also unintentionally breed apathy in its users. While anhedonia has not been clinically proven as a side effect, it has been reported by many users. Apathy is a saboteur of meaningful relationships and career growth, particularly in a world where women face more obstacles than men on the path to achieving the same results.
Apathy and decreased motivation are inherent consequences that users must consider when using GLP-1s to treat obesity, Type 2 diabetes, and addiction. But when this drug is marketed to people who are not facing serious health risks, the costs may begin to outweigh the benefits. Med spas and telehealth companies such as Ro and Hims & Hers have made GLP-1s and non-FDA-approved compound varieties easily accessible to users without a doctor’s rigorous approval process. This accessibility risks GLP-1s falling into the hands of people with disordered eating tendencies.
Due to societal pressures, women are much more likely to use GLP-1s for reasons outside of the drug’s intended targets of diabetes and obesity. Social media, diet culture, and overall sociocultural attitudes have been identified as culprits that often trigger eating disorders and dissatisfaction with body image. In itself, not eating enough food can cause weakened immunity, cardiac decline, cognitive impairment, and hair loss. All of these consequences limit the scope of a person’s capacity for growth and development. When GLP-1’s are brought into the picture, and are being heavily targeted towards women, whilst decreasing motivation, how does that alter career ambition, the role of women in communities, women’s reliance on men, and the overall voice of women in society?
A society built upon patriarchy demands the continuous fight for women’s rights. Gender equity has not been achieved in the United States. As of 2026, women make 81 cents to a man’s dollar, work an average of 1.7 hours more unpaid labor daily than men, and are more likely to be victims of domestic abuse. Federal protection for women’s autonomy over their bodies through the right to abortion is no longer ensured after the 2022 Supreme Court case, Dobbs v. Jackson, which overturned Roe v. Wade. Cultural narratives and systemic structures against women continue to persist in society, and the idealism of extreme thinness in women, with or without GLP-1s, reinforces patriarchal ideology by eroding women’s capacity for mental and physical development. Undernourished women cannot meet their full potential, and become less equipped to overcome barriers to break the glass ceiling
None of this is to suggest that thinness itself is inherently problematic, or that naturally thin individuals are somehow complicit. The problem lies in the systemic, persistent messaging that equates women’s size with worth, deprivation with discipline, and size with beauty. With or without GLP-1s and the ways they may alter brain chemistry, a person denied fuel is a person who is less motivated and more tractable. That difference could be all it takes to break the glass ceiling — or not.
