Christina Hendricks

Christina Hendricks: Busty & Curvy in Esquire

christina-hendricks-busty-curvy-in-esquire

christina-hendricks-busty-curvy-in-esquire

Here’s one of our favorite curvy girls + her complete hotness: Mad Men’s Christina Hendricks!

Once again, Christina brings her curvy and sexy arsenal: super full and plump cleavage, rounded hips, red locks, white, immaculate skin and an overall soft & very feminine figure.

christina-hendricks-busty-curvy-in-esquire-1

How do you like Christina’s figure and spread in Esquire Magazine?

There are more pictures after the jump, you have to see them!

christina-hendricks-busty-curvy-in-esquire-2

christina-hendricks-busty-curvy-in-esquire-3

christina-hendricks-busty-curvy-in-esquire-4

Incoming search terms:

christina hendricks size, skinny busty, what size is christina hendricks, busty curvy, christina hendricks silicone, Christina Hendricks busty, curvy busty, christina hendricks vital statistics, busty and curvy, christina hendricks stats
Previous ArticleNext Article
  • Anonymous

    She is one of my absolute favorites. Is it just me, or does she look a bit slimmer than the last time you posted about her? Photoshop(I sincerely hope not 🙁 ) or weight loss, I wonder? Either way, she still has her awesome curves and still looks healthy and luscious 😀

  • sassy

    She looks great here but I think they photoshopped her arms smaller and DEFINITELY her waist smaller, her waist is not that size in candids. It looks to me like her boobs were the only thing they didn’t feel the need to shrink.

  • mEEE

    Although they probably photoshopped her (sucks that its the standard in mags now), I still think this woman is the sexiest, hottest thing in Hollywood right now! Everyone can keep their size 00 actresses and give me a woman that would fit right in with Marylin Monroe, Jane Mansfield, Sophia Loren and Jane Russell. I am a 100% straight female, yet this woman completely fascinates me!

    • Cheryl

      Marilyn Monroe was actually quite small – her measurements were said to be 35-22-35 to 38-23-36, depending on who you ask. Those measurements would make her between size 0 and six in pants, depending on the brand.

      That being said, I absolutely adore Christina Hendricks. I think she is incredibly beautiful and sexy, and I would totally be a lesbian for her lol (Okay maybe not really, but close).

      • Ella

        I agree. The only ‘big’ measurements these women have are their busts and hips, but their waists would put them in today’s equivalents of the extra small sizes.

        Mansfield was 40-21-36.

        Loren is 38-24-38.

        Russell is 38-24-36.

        Sure, their busts would place them in today’s 12s to 16s in tops and their hips in trousers that are now sizes 4-8, but they would still have to have the waists taken in to the equivalent of today’s 000-2!

        These women don’t really fit in the plus size or the size 0 world: they’re in a category entirely their own with big curves and insanely tiny waists. No clothes off the rack will fit them! They’re going to need a lot of tailoring or custom-made stuff.

        Even if they are in a category that seems non-existent today, I would also LOVE to see more of them.

        • Uma

          Lol, you should really stop believing everything that is listed on the internet. The first measurements are – and i’m almost sure about this – physically imposible, w/o surgery of course. Do you realise how insanely small a 21″ waist is? Mine is about 23, and the belt i need around my waist is so small that myself am absolutely stunned at its size. To imagine that someone has naturally a 40 inch bust and 21 inch waist is stupid and naive. You’re doing exactly what you are expected to do: not thinking by yourself. Oh yeah, she also said her waist was 18″. Suuure. Just look at the damn pictures. If you’re too fat to know how such a waist would actually look like, that you’re problem, but stop selling b/s

          • Ella

            I am not going to say that those measurements are facts, but what else do I have to go on? I can’t easily build a time machine to go back to the past and measure famous people. If I am ‘selling bs’, where is your factual evidence that so-and-so does NOT have a 21 inch waist? Only because it ‘doesn’t look like it from photos’ and you choose to believe it is impossible. I wouldn’t say that is any more reliable than finding the average measurements of what web sites claim.

            A 21 inch waist is physically possible. Especially if a person is shorter than average with a small frame. For example, plenty of Asian women are naturally that size. Most of my Asian relatives are that small (and no, none of them have had surgery). You can also check out the post about Megan Fox claiming she has a 22 inch waist. There are a number of women there who are (or have relatives who are) as small as that or even smaller!

            I know and have known women that have had very small waists and large breasts (several that needed custom made bras). It is rare, but it certainly exists 100% naturally. Sure, it is not common, but that doesn’t mean it never happens.

            You can’t tell someone’s measurements from simply looking at photos unless you have something you KNOW the size of to compare to. Even then, depending on distance from the object, clothing, the fact that it is a three-dimensional object in a 2D photo, etc… makes calculating that far more complex than most people believe it is. In other words, just a glance is not enough to say you know someone’s vital statistics.

            As for all the insults flung at me for no reason… they say a lot more about you than they do about me.

          • Anonymous

            “To imagine that someone has naturally a 40 inch bust and 21 inch waist is stupid and naive.”
            Ever hear of “tight lacing” and “corset training”? With those practices, it is entirely possible to have a 40″ bust(that’s not the band measurement, BTW, that’s around her breasts) and a tiny, tiny waist. Don’t know if she did it, or if her measurements are accurate, though, I’m just commenting because your snippy and insulting attitude rubbed me the wrong way this morning.

            “If you’re too fat to know how such a waist would actually look like, that you’re problem, but stop selling b/s”
            That’s just plain *beep* ignorant and unnecessary, especially considering the person you are responding to was in no way being an ass with their post.

          • Cheryl

            Uhh, okay, I am going to have to disagree with you on this. My mom’s waist was smaller than 22″ when she was that age, and even at age 50 after having two kids, she had a 25 inch waist.
            Marilyn Monroe was fairly petite; I think it is reasonable to belive that she could have had a proportionally small waist that was much smaller than her bust and hips. Her measurements also varied (like most women) over the course of her life. It seems like you are arguing for the bs that society is currently feeding us about Marilyn Monroe wearing a size 12 or 16 or whatever. I am just saying that Marilyn, although curvy, was still very tiny.
            And yes, 18 inches sounds unreasonable for her, but 22-24 inches does not. If you are going to say that something is medically impossible, please provide some kind of research or documentation. I am trying to respectfully disagree, so please let’s not start a flame war 🙂

          • Uma

            i wish you guys would read EVERYTHING I SAID. i am not going to go on, b/c when i say NATURAL and than you come with the corset training, fine. but fyi you can tell from pictures. not her size, but the difference. i didn;t say a 18 inch waist was impossible, i said it DOES NOT COME WITH NATULAL 40 INCH BOOBS. seriously, read before atacking and going on on and on and on with the same s**t

          • Cheryl

            Uma, I will actually agree with you on the Mansfield issue – I don’t know if this is true, but I read that her waist was that small b/c she had some kind of medical condition when she was young. I think the other measurements are possible (Monroe, Loren, Russell). I think there were pics of Sophia Loren posted a few days ago and it does not appear that she has a 24″ waist, but it is not really possible to take measurements from a picture. As Ella mentioned, we cannot take a 3D measurement from a 2D photo. It is possible that I slightly misread your post, but I did try to reply respectfully and I ask that you do the same. Thanks 🙂
            Anyway, point is, I agree with you regarding Jayne Mansfield.

          • putty

            ummm… my measurements are 38/24/34 and back when i used to tight lace(corseting) my waist got down to a 19… considering the time that those people are from they could have been corseting in which those sizes are completely reasonable not to mention that people of the past were smaller it is only because of better nutrition that we are as large as we are today(in america people are still generally much smaller in most asian countries because of being malnourished in the past) they would however not have been even close to a size 0 by todays standards considering i am a size 2(with pants scraping my hip bone) at 34″ if they are 36″ they would be a 4-6 depending on the thickness of their legs… but enough of a history lesson i suppose if anyone wants to fact check anything i’ve said i encourage it.

      • mEEE

        What I meant by women in that group is that they had soft, volumptuous, yet attainable bodies (at least by today’s standards). I am well aware that although M Monroe is often said to have been a size 12, the truth is she would probably be considered a size 6/8 at most by today’s measurements. Anything above a size 8 in Hollywood today is probably considered obese 🙁

      • Linda

        She’s part of my “go gay for” list too!

        • ruby_marie

          It is entirely possible to have a person with a size 20 to 24 waist and have a size 40 chest. This is a medical condition called macromastia. It is the release of excessive hormones that cause the accellerated increase of mammory tissues either during the teen years after the onset of purberty or after the birth of a child. It is only a difference of 16-20 inches and I have a difference of 15 inches between the size of my waist and the size of my chest. (That makes it REALLY hard to find clothes that fit) I just wanted to clarify the fact that the condition is possible.

  • Mrs. L

    This woman is amazingly gorgeous…very womanly, it is nice to see something other than a size 0!
    I agree with the above, I loved the figures like Marylin and jJane Russell and Sophia Loren back in the day…wish they’d bring that back to Hollywood and advertisement…I love when a dress looks filled out on a woman, rather than hanging on her like it was on a hanger.

    Christina Hendricks is sexy!

  • anabel

    I’d dream of her if I was a man, she has a gorgeous face and a beautiful, sexy body. Amazing.

  • Valentine

    Her figure is absolutely stunning – even if they’ve photoshopped her a little bit (and she does look a tiny bit slimmer), she’s still got her curves and she still looks amazing. And seriously, a round of applause for her for the red hair and fair skin (though I’m somewhat biased, I’m a fair skinned redhead too…) – it’s fantastic to see someone who doesn’t feel the need to be super-tanned and super-blonde (or super-dark haired, a la Megan Fox, which just looks cheap and nasty)

    • anabel

      hey, I’m one too! high 5! ^^

    • tulona

      You know some people do have black as their natural hair color, even ifm they’re Caucasian. I thinl that Megan’s natural hair color is black or a very dark shade of brown. Calling naturally dark-haired people cheap and nasty isn’t really fair. But I agree with you about over-tanned people, and those who have hair so unnaturally blond that it glows in the dark, looking weird.

      • Kae

        Thanks for writing that. I have really dark hair and blue eyes but I don’t think I look trashy!

      • Valentine

        Ohhh, no, I didn’t mean it looks trashy when it’s natural, it looks absolutely stunning when it’s natural. One of my best friends has naturally very dark brown hair, very light skin and blue eyes and she’s beautiful. I don’t think Megan Fox’s look is natural, is what I meant, I don’t think her hair’s naturally that dark. It’s her particular mix of the long, super-straightened, clearly dyed, dark hair and over-tanned skin. I just think if you have fair skin you might as well embrace it! I wasn’t meaning to sound unfair or nasty, I apologise.

        anabel: high 5 right back 😀

  • samba

    of course they photoshopped her! they photo shop everyone! including your size 00 models! of course they do…except no one likes to admit it with the skinny models…but as soon as someone bigger is photoshopped its like ‘well of course she was photoshopped…she is too big’…i wish ppl would realise the skinnies are just as photoshopped…if not more so.
    this woman is disgustingly luscious and sexy! she is just a fox! this is real sex appeal! not like tart face megan fox (who i do think is pretty
    ) just she is so oversexual and over made up! this woman just has the ‘it’ factor

    • Uma

      They photoshop boobs and hips onto skinny models, they photoshop them off the curvy girls. So that everyone looks the same, fake and plastic. It’s just tiring and useless to fight agains the photoshop trend, precisely b/c it is soooo used.

      • Cheryl

        Uma you practically took the words out of my mouth 🙂
        Yes, they photoshop everyone; I think they photoshopped her less than they do many others, including some models

  • She is so hot. i totally envy her body. its soo sexy and lush, its how i want to be.

  • Maryna

    Beautiful! But either she lost weight, or they made her look slimmer. Oh well, don’t care, she is gorgeous no matter what!

  • Uma

    Bla bla bla, photoshop, bla bla bla. Same old same old. Aren’t you people bored with admiring photoshoped figures, and calling it perfection and so on?

    • I agree.
      I also don’t think it’s right to use photoshop, as it gives the viewer an unrealistic view of people.

  • tulona

    Christina is a gorgeous woman. She seems to have just the right amount of sex appeal. Bravo to her from bringing curvy back in popular demand!

  • bia

    I reckon it would be hard to keep your skin perfectly pale

  • april

    noooo way!! is this the same woman really?!!
    they changed her so ridiculously, I’m shocked! :-O

  • I am not a fan of the red hair but her body rocks she is so 1960s and reminds me to my mother’s old pictures lovely ladies from that generation 🙂 all my respect .

  • brittany

    i love her!

  • Kae

    She sure is attractive! And yes….she’s very photoshopped.

  • Cheryl

    I just noticed – in the last pic she looks a bit like Angelina Jolie. I wish I hadn’t noticed that 🙁

  • maria

    what a beautiful woman!Looks like a Middle-Age painting,with her gorgeous red hair and sexy,voluptuous body figure.

  • Dogsbollocks

    omg that UMA!….DARLING, DO YOU WORK OR HAVE ACTUALLY A LIFE????? I would hate to know someone as pathetic as you!

  • becca

    I LOOOOOOVE Christina Hendricks – especially as Joan on Mad Men. She’s beautiful and has an AMAZING body!

  • jacaranda

    the waist/hip/bust combination is possible — when I was in my 30’s (I’m 56 now) I had a naturally 24 inch waist and was 38-24-28 — it was impossible to find clothes that fit properly! I had to buy the size 14 skirt and have it tapered, and a longer zipper put in so I could get into it. the same thing happened with dresses, and I could never keep blouses tucked in. I also bought size “small” belts and had to have extra holes put in them –I’m 5’9″ tall and actually I found that some dresses from the 50’s fit me better — they were built for curvier women. I miss my 24″ waist now, but its a lot easier to buy clothes that its not three sizes smaller than the rest of me…

  • Cheryl

    Sure all model or celebrity photos are manipulated these days. I took a photoshop retouching class and the part on fashion photography drastically retouched the already skinny models reducing their hips by about a 1/3 their width or more, removing any natural curve or hint of tummy, stretching their arms and legs to make them look longer and leaner. That was truly freakish looking compared to the originals. But it’s what people are now used to seeing. Almost like people don’t know what’s natural anymore. But nature can make all kinds of combinations.

    Variations are found in nature all the time. And variations are good things! And self acceptance shouldn’t come from putting other people down because they’re different whether it’s curvy vs skinny, dark hair vs red or blonde. It’s all a matter of genetics and personal aesthetics. A friend of mine has a t-shirt that reads “Everybody’s Somebody’s Fetish” and it’s true. Not everyone can have the same chest-to-waist-to-hip ratio. Why would they want to?

    Also, I don’t doubt that people had much tinier waists back in the 50s and 60s.The modern North American diet is loaded high cholesterol, fatty, larger-proportioned, junk food, fast food etc. Not saying that everybody these days eats like that, but it does take more effort now to avoid bad things in food. There’s probably a ton of other factors too. Like the structure of the clothing, and undergarments were different back then. Clothing was tailored to fit, and many women wore girdles and things to enhance their shape. Plus those measurements for the actresses were probably taken early on in their career and left unchanged over time.

  • mmmmm

    simply the best of the best!! perfect lover, worst wife possible (wouldn’t be able to sleep at night)