No, no, you can’t pull that. They might have a different definition of brute in their story, but that’s not the definition you use in your piece. Robert Jones Jr said of the term in that piece this:
The “brute” critique has nothing to do with who Wolfe is or what her stature happens to be, and everything to do with how she’s portrayed as having a white Amazon beat her across the back with a staff and not be fazed by it…
Yours, on the other hand, sets up a specific physical paradigm between her and her counterparts:
… portrayed as a masculine brute while her white counterparts all had distinctive hourglass figures with perky, perfectly round breasts …
These are your words. You’re saying that she looks like a brute. You’re using the term exactly the opposite as RJJ defined it in the piece you’re citing. It really sounds to me like you didn’t understand his point, and in the process you’ve said something blatantly offensive about somebody based entirely on how they look.
RJJ had a much more compelling point, too, which makes it all the more frustrating that you’d cite it to defend your shameful comments. He makes a very good point of calling out that the scene depicts a person of color being beaten and unfazed by a rod, feeding into a racist trope most of us probably hadn’t considered before. Then you hijack his term and use it to say something vain and insensitive about how masculine and brutish the actress looks compared to her hourglass-figured, perfect-breasted co-stars.
I want you to realize why that sentence is offensive. I sincerely hope you don’t believe it, and I assume you’re just too proud to capitulate to somebody complaining about it on the internet, but you should acknowledge that you’re saying something insulting about how the actress looks, and that’s the problem.
Unless you stand by that, in which case, there’s nothing more to say.