Mariska Hargitay’s Skewed Self Assessment

Is Mariska Hargitay’s appraisal of her body self-deprecation, the misuse of a term commonly used to mean Self_november_mariska_hargitay_5
“plus-sized,” or the result of working in an industry where
breakfast is a cigarette and a swig of Starbucks? I don’t know, but it depresses the hell out of me.

In the midst of an otherwise resoundingly sane statement about eating in moderation, she describes herself in a jaw-dropping way. From Self’s “Living the Joy,” November:

“I’m a full-figured woman.”

I can’t decide what’s sadder: the idea that the healthy-looking Hargitay is a Hollywood version of full-figured, or that actresses with sharp-as-knives shoulder blades are considered so average that, in comparison, she actually is.

12 thoughts on “Mariska Hargitay’s Skewed Self Assessment

  1. Mariska beautiful, always beautiful on the cover of the magazine Self.Acho Mariska beautiful because they do not seem anorexic women, skinny overpaid. Mariska is curvilinear, sexy and very attractive. As a man like women who have breast and butt. Mariska is divine.

  2. It would be hard to be Jane Mansfield’s daughter and NOT be curvy!

    I would say that, in her case, full-figured means she has a butt and boobs, unlike most of the Hollywood actresses these days. If she’d said she was plus-sized or overweight, then we’d all have permission to smack her upside the head.

  3. I haven’t read the article yet so I can’t make a more specific comment, but I’ve been following Mariska’s career for years now and have read several statements she’s made on her body – she most definitely has a very healthy body image. She’s proud of her curves, so that self-deprecation conjecture is way off. Mariska Hargitay is a breath of fresh air in a world of size zeros and women who torture themselves to look like walking sticks.

  4. I don’t belive for a second that mariska has a scewed view of her body. She is one of the very few powerful and successful women in Hollywood who loves and appreciates her body. I for one applause her for not execessively dieting after the birth of her son to look like a size zero. She is also one of the very few mothers in Hollywood who appears to have lost the weight she gained while pregnant in moderations and over time. Look at angelina jolie, the woman had twins and months later she look rail thin, pail and unhealthy. Hargitay at the Emmy’s a few weeks ago looked amazing and sexy like a real woman should look. In my opinion she is one of very few actresses who has a very healthy view of her body. She has never been the insecure type and she has never aspired to be a size zero.

  5. To the other commenters — I think the point is that the word “full-figured” is generally used as a euphemism for “overweight”…. or, used to be, until being massively underweight became the norm in Hollywood, which is why “full-figured” has come to describe slender women who show the usual signs of being past puberty, thereby implying that to have hips, breasts, or a butt at all is something unusual that needs to be explained.

    Hargitay is a beautiful woman, but she is only “full” anything in comparison to Hollywood women, and I guess in comparison to the women who are dead-set on imitating them.

  6. this is stupid. we all know mariska didn’t mean she thought of herself as plus sized. she just meant that she is curvy. that’s a GOOD thing! She has hips, an ass, and boobs. that’s what she meant by full figured. instead of the ‘normal size’, meaning looking like nicole kidman, or paris hilton. i think her statement makes perfect since. she is full figured and i admire her for that.

  7. Way to take the words out of Mariska’s mouth the wrong way. She’s one of only a handful of women in Hollywood that stand up for women, that sets a positive body and mental image for women and that serves as a champion of every woman. Compared to the sickness-of-skinny in Hollywood, she is full-figured. Stop trying to make her an example of what’s wrong when she’s the example of everything that’s right.

  8. I think that if she means full figured in contrast to other actresses, she’s right… in the sense that they are NOT full… many look depleted to me. I’ll buy that many of them- most even- are naturally of the lean’n'lanky, ectomorphic body type, but an increasing number of them look like starved-down, hollowed-out versions of a figure tending more naturally to curvaceousness.

    I have not read the article, but I would imagine it’s likely her quotes were arranged by the writer/editor so that no matter the tone of what she actually said, it would be congruent with the overall message of magazines such as this one- that a woman can only really ever ‘make peace’ with a larger-than-an-average-Hollywood-starlet figure- NEVER can it be suggested you can also, just, y’know, really DIG having boobs and a butt and other assorted nice lil fleshy bits. That this can also be a fun state of existence is absolutely anathema to their commercial ethos.

    Mariska always seems pretty pleased with her hot self, and while it’s horrifying to learn that there is a high school in existence where a Best Physique was awarded, I read some time ago that Mariska won it at hers. I would wager she’s prolly had overwhelmingly positive responses to her bod throughout her life, but womens’ magazines are notoriously reluctant to admit that this would be possible for anyone over a size 2.

  9. You’re a plum fool (to the OP). like someone said, stop trying to make her as what’s wrond and dingy about Hollywood. You just took that ou of context, she is not some chick tyring to desperately prove that she is plus sized. She way too intelligent and wonderful for that. The way you’re talking about her I’m thinking that you got her confused with one of those stick-thin tabloid starlets or something.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


4 × five =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>