NYT Apologizes For ‘Angry Black Woman’ Comment in Shonda Rhimes Review

about women and race. They are worth exploring in depth. This is a preliminary post, and I’ll be adding to it later today, or posting again. But I’ll say this much: The readers and commentators are correct to protest this story. Intended to be in praise of Ms. Rhimes, it delivered that message in a condescending way that was — at best — astonishingly tone-deaf and out of touch.

[Click here to read Sullivan’s response]

Alessandra also released a statement to Us Weekly addressing the review, telling the outlet:

In the review, I referenced a painful and insidious stereotype solely in order to praise Ms. Rhimes and her shows for traveling so far from it. If making that connection between the two offended people, I feel bad about that. But I think that a full reading allows for a different takeaway than the loudest critics took. The same applies to your question about ‘less than classically beautiful.’ Viola Davis said it about herself in the NYT magazine, more bluntly. I commended Ms. Rhimes for casting an actress who doesn’t conform to television’s narrow standards of beauty; I have said the same thing about Helen Mirren in Prime Suspect. I didn’t think Times readers would take the opening sentence literally… Regrettably, this stereotype is still too incendiary to raise even in arguing that Ms. Rhimes has killed it once and for all.

The initial review received backlash from Rhimes, Scandal’s Kerry Washington and numerous other folk in Hollywood.

Rhimes has yet to respond to the NYT apology, but retweeted the following article:

What are your thoughts? Did some overreact without reading the article in its entirety? Or is using the term ‘Angry Black Woman’ never a good idea?

Follow me: @theJasmineBRAND on Twitter | theJasmineBRAND on Facebook | theJasmineBRAND on Instagram