// What are the site’s guidelines for contributors?
Our aim is to publish a wide range of perspectives on feminism and religion – we operate without bias and welcome all viewpoints as that is the core purpose of the site. However, contributors must adhere to these basic journalistic guidelines:
1 – Both the writer and this site mutually agree to a sub-editing process, as per industry standards for newspapers or magazines (shortening of length, correction of grammar, etc). The writer will be given thorough opportunity to assess these changes and give their sign off.
2 – The piece must be presented in interview format. Guests are permitted to write their piece as a monologue as long as they are happy for it to be edited into an interview style piece. Again the writer will be given full opportunity to assess these changes and give their sign off.
3 – Interviewees are welcome to challenge schools of thought or denominations, but pieces that are specifically directed against an individual are not what we are wanting. This site will not become host to personal attacks written by one person against another as this is counter to the site’s desire to highlight nuances in theology, not in personal dispute.
4 – Anonymous pieces cannot be published. We understand the strong benefit of anonymity when writing on such sensitive topics, but for this particular project we will only published pieces by an identified author.
// How do you find contributors?
People are welcome to contact us via the contact page and put themselves forward as contributors. Not all pieces can be accepted due to the large amount we are receiving. Do send us a message if interested.
The site is a growing body of work. In an ideal world this site would have an utterly perfect balance of different perspectives, genders, nuances and intersectionality. However, we are dependent on our contributors availability and time. It’s possible that due to some people getting back to us faster than others, the interviews we post will not always achieve this balance at every step.
The only way to achieve that would be to wait until we’d done all the interviews, then publish them all at once – which isn’t conducive to a blog format, or to readers with minimal time on their hands! Our aim is to end up with a site that reflects balance and explores intersectionality in all its depth. But we appreciate your patience as we acquire the interviews needed to achieve this.
// Male voices:
Some feminists argue that men should not get to contribute to projects like this one. They feel that after two thousand years of patriarchy, men have said enough and women should be the sole voices within feminist conversation. We believe that true feminism represents equality for both men and women; not the silencing of men. So men’s voices will be given space here too. We will probably end up with a heavier balance of female voices, but male contributors will take part as a sign that we feel feminism must affirm equality for all, regardless of gender.
// Challenges we face:
In launching a site dealing with such sensitive issues, we are unsurprised to already have had problems with a couple of people stirring up dissent. The site will air many different viewpoints, all of which are likely to have their own enemies!
Several people have approached us aggressively and demanded that they be published without the above guidelines; writers who feel they are above our simple house-rules and should be free to use this site as a place for monologues directly attacking other contributors. When we have simply repeated that our guidelines apply to all, they have accused us of bias in who we publish, which is laughable as our sole aim is to represent all perspectives.
All we ask is that the above guidelines be honoured. Sending us a piece with “You can’t edit this in any way” at the top of the email (which happened recently) means we are literally unable to move forward with it, so it won’t be able to be considered. Again, if the piece is a direct criticism of a named person, we aren’t wanting to publish that. So it would need to be re-submitted as a critique of a school of thought.
We need basic house-rules and journalistic guidelines to help the site be a healthy and safe place for people as the topics discussed are both sensitive and controversial.
Thank you to the thousands of readers that are visiting this site and for the many positive messages we are receiving. The project is just getting started so we are excited for all that’s ahead.