44
One could examine the rejection of stereotyping in Outlier and understand this as 
a move towards positive political change. The protagonist of the piece, Malaika, is 
starkly different from Hubbard’s categorisation of stereotypes towards black wom-
en in media as “angry”, “jezebel[s]”, “mamm[ies]” or “labor mule[s]”  
(Hubbard 2025). However, as Outlier is based on a true story (being an  
autobiographical piece about Malaika Kegode’s own youth), the avoidance of black 
stereotypes cannot be read as a progressive political decision towards protest, 
so much as a passive decision to accurately represent herself. This is not to say 
that Outlier’s avoidance of stereotypes is not positive, however, as there is still a 
positive political significance to this. Instead, we must view this as proof of a more 
accepting public (that such a protagonist would be received positively both by 
producers and audiences), instead of a movement towards one.  
Jamie, while often fulfilling stereotypes of gay men, is also based on a true story, 
which could be argued to negate the harm done in presenting such stark  
stereotyping. Representation within Jamie, then, becomes somewhat negative, as 
it pushes and purports a narrative that gay men are flamboyant, feminine, and a 
disappointment to their fathers. The presentation of Jamie as a disappointment to 
his father is especially damaging, as it enforces the notion that “the queer child is 
an unhappy object for most parents” (Ahmed 2010: 92). Ahmed explains how such 
a concept is reductive, as it “reminds us that the queer life is already constructed 
as an unhappy life”, thus, to propose that the dominant experience amongst queer 
youth is shame (Ahmed 2010: 93). These musicals positively enable the rejection 
of the single story by bringing real stories to light. Through the expansion of the  
representation of queerness and racial diversity, more voices are given an  
opportunity to present their viewpoint, thus rejecting Adichie’s single story: “Power 
is the ability not just to tell the story of another person, but to make it the definitive 
story of that person” (Adichie 2009).  
Jamie is often reported to have a happy ending, as Jamie can overcome his  
personal struggles and attend his school’s prom with support from friends and 
family to be his true self. This is particularly of note when considering Ahmed’s 
writings on the publishability of queer positivity, and how “queer fiction [...] could 
not give happiness to its characters as queers” (2010: 88). In order for queerness to 
be able to enter the media, it had to be seen as undesirable, else it would be seen 
as “making queers appear ‘good’: as the ‘promotion’ of the social value of queer 
lives, or an attempt to influence readers to become queer” (Ahmed 2010: 88). 
Therefore, we can observe in Jamie proof of the shifting political opinions within 
Britain. As for a positive queer narrative to be published, queerness must not be 
villainised, demonised, or forced to appear undesirable.  
On the contrary, the narrative of Jamie pushes far from the tradition of queer  
media’s negativity. The latter is explained by Love, that there must be “a genealogy 
of queer affect that does not overlook the negative, shameful, and difficult feelings 

View this content as a flipbook by clicking here.