Article Submission Policy

We welcome plurals and their allies to submit reviews of mass media and professional publication articles regarding plurals, plurality, political issues directly affecting plurals, scientific peer-reviewed journal articles, etc.

Only site authors will be allowed to write op-eds.  Please see the requirements below for what this means.

For a list of articles pending submission, please see our Pending News page.  Please do not submit any articles on our Dishonorable Mentions page as review articles.  They’ve been deemed unsuitable for review because they’re not actually about plurality in any way.

Submission requirements:

  • We accept submissions of journalistic reviews of original mass media works and articles. For some tutorial-level assistance, please see How to Write for Cerberus Plural.  In the case of simultaneous submissions for the same article, we prefer submissions by plurals, and reserve the right to decline a submission.
  • We will consider original works if you are conducting first-hand research: interviews, studies, surveys, hypothesis, thesis, eye-witness accounts, etc.  This is not a peer-reviewed journal as in people with honorifics and certificates on the wall, but our editorial board will review and vet original works for journalistic integrity and quality and decide whether they meet our standards and provide value to our readers.  They will go into our Original Works section and may also be cross-posted to other categories depending on content.
  • No self-promotion, no advertising, no hawking goods, etc. You may include a link to your website in a brief bio at the end of your article, but don’t promote yourself.
  • Please keep articles timely. We will consider articles depending on how timely they are: some peer-reviewed journal articles will always be timely so we will accept reviews of original research and study-based journal articles published in the last 5 years (ask in our contact form (redirects to Eclectic Tech) if you feel something written further back is still timely). However peer review articles where someone pulls together disparate research to make a point or create a new thesis should be less than 2 years old since the evidence it’s based on gets older, too. Movie releases, within 1 month unless there’s a reason to bring it up again (such as a re-release, bonus materials/commentary on the DVD release, a sequel coming out, anniversary hub-bub, etc.). News articles, interviews, etc. will depend on what it’s about — but the sooner the better.
  • Please get as close to the original sources as possible.  In other words, try not to review a review (unless it’s a newsworthy review in itself — i.e. you are covering a particular news outlet’s original take on a movie).  Look out for articles reviewing another article and click on links to get to the original work whenever possible. Hints on whether or not you’re looking at an original source: they performed interviews, they link to many disparate sources (i.e. research) to draw the article together, they saw something first-hand (the movie, an event, etc.), etc. If there’s one link and they’re solely discussing what’s at the link then you should go to the original link and review that, not the article linking to the link.
  • Please only submit direct quotes from the original work as a quote or block-quote.  You may start a paragraph with >> to indicate it’s a block-quote i.e. the whole paragraph is from the original article/source. Otherwise use normal “quotation marks” to depict any direct quotes from the original work.
  • Be careful about plagiarism. Make sure what you’re writing is a review of the original, written in your own words.
  • Edit your opinion. This is about a review/summary of the original work, especially highlighting what is relevant to plurals. Allow people to come to their own conclusions about what is wrong or right.
  • If the original work requires content warnings, please include that in your article.  What requires content warnings? Any graphic or detailed descriptions of abuse, torment, trauma, medical or other techniques commonly employed to “cure” mental issues or illnesses, sexual content, mature language or depictions/descriptions of violence, demonization of persons with mental illness, etc. If you aren’t sure, then put the content warning and let the reader figure it out.  If the article doesn’t meet these criteria you may simply say that the original work does not contain content of a graphic or disturbing nature.
  • Write for the masses. Please spell out the first occurrence of an acronym, explain it if needed, don’t use jargon unless explained, and please write for an approximate 8th grade or lower education (i.e. Wall Street Journal standards).
  • Use plural-positive language and nomenclature.
    • Persons within a plural system are “residents” or “headmates” or “plural system members” rather than “alters” or “personalities”.
    • When addressing the entire plural system, append “&” to their host or body name to indicate the “and company” or the “-and” suffix that denotes discussing the plural system as a group entity.
    • Avoid pronouns or use “they” as the proper 3rd-person-plural pronoun unless they have made their pronoun choice(s) clear.
    • Always address what type of “system” you mean i.e. do not assume that “system” means plural; they are a “plural system” or “multiple system,” not a synonym for a process, a “school system” or a “solar system.”  Similarly a person doesn’t “have” a system (that would be a process); they are a member of a system.
    • Clarify individual members of a plural system with “Individual of System Name” or “Individual of Host&” when you’re naming a plural system member versus the entire system.
    • Never imply that someone may be faking being plural, even in an op-ed.  Even if a so-called “expert” claims they are falsely claiming a diagnosis. Plurality is a subjective experience.
  • By submitting your article, you give us permission to post it on the site.  We may need to edit your article for correctness, typos, and/or non-journalistic content.  If possible, we will contact you with suggested corrections.  If you don’t leave contact information, we either will publish with minor edits, or reject the article if (in our opinion) it requires substantive changes to meet our editorial requirements such that it would alter your authorship or contribution.
  • Anonymous submissions are the norm if you are not a vetted site author.  All anonymous submissions will be written by the site author Spot& Cerberus.  You still are the author and own the copyright to your work.  Site admins may or may not know who you are depending on what information you submit.  Your anonymous article still must meet these guidelines or it will be rejected. If we don’t know who you are, we cannot back-up your copyright claims for anonymous articles posted on the site.  You may still sign your article and add a brief 25-50 word bio at the footer of your article.
  • Please write your article in separate software and save it. It belongs to you. Copy & Paste into the form for submission. We cannot guarantee we’ll retain copies of rejected articles.
  • “Op-Eds”: otherwise known as “opinion editorials” are submitted pieces that are colored by the author’s opinions on a specific topic. These are not journalistic or clinical in nature and may include political rants and pleas for taking certain action, judgements, conjecture, forecasting, etc.  We will only accept op-eds from fully vetted site authors who have a login on this site. We will not post anonymous op-eds.  Stand behind your opinion, or keep it to yourself. Do not use this form to submit op-eds unless you have a login on

We are accepting submissions via email or Discord. Please email us about your article idea, or with a synopsis here, or join our Discord server and request a writing role for more guidance.