faq

about opp

oxford public philosophy is: 

“a journal space for critically questioning what philosophy is and how we're doing it, in form and content. we welcome work that investigates received assumptions about the nature and aims of philosophical inquiry, including contributions that question structural norms of currently dominant research programmes. opp will contribute to rigorous discussion of these matters in part through openness to different genres, styles and themes. the aim is to make room for the possibility of strengthening, broadening or contesting our interpretative frameworks and field of consideration. 

open for all”

opp’s ethical principles

• we endeavour to give a platform to work aligning with our values of diversity, inclusion /critical inquiry and amplifying the voices of groups who have been historically underrepresented in philosophical discourse. 

• we particularly encourage submissions from Black, Asian, Indigenous, and Multiracial contributors. Wherever possible, we aim to assign submissions to a member of our team with shared experiences to the author when this background is integral to appreciating the meaning of the piece or to invite such a consulting editor where no such current opp team member exists. For example, we aim to assign essays about the Black experience to a Black editor. All submissions we receive will be reviewed by at least two members of the opp team.

• we also encourage work from contributors of marginalised groups including but not limited to trans people / queer people / disabled people / refugees / immigrants / unhoused people / currently or previously incarcerated people / people whose homelands are not recognised by the UN international community

• at opp, we reject the leveraging of the phrase ‘free speech’ to justify the publication of material that could incite harm or hatred towards marginalised peoples.

• we do not favour pieces that are provocative for provocation’s sake.

• we have a zero-tolerance policy for work that promotes bigotry, abuse, and systemic oppression, including but not limited to: white supremacy, racism, pro-colonialism, fascism, antisemitism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, queerphobia, ableism, classism, xenophobia, and so on. Work that promotes systemic oppression will not be accepted for publication at opp. We welcome work that aims to dismantle systemic oppression and work that engages critically with problematic philosophical material from the past and present.

guidelines for prose submissions to the journal

1. Is opp the right journal for your piece? 

Each turn of the opp journal is based on a selection of subthemes. These subthemes are chosen due to dominating philosophies' marginalising and under discussing them entirely, disrespectfully, superficially, exploitatively. We recognise there are intersecting forms of power and domination even between less voiced and visible philosophies such that there can be further forms of domination within some forms of philosophy we are also choosing to include.

These subthemes are also chosen in conjunction with the journal’s ability to secure an acting board of folks working in the field either in and beyond institutions, academia, non-academic non-institutional collaborations including independent thinkers that will aid in responsible acceptance of submissions. If you have a piece or are willing to develop a piece that is in line with a subtheme, we invite you to consider submitting to the opp journal.

(We are attempting to question procedures we find problematic and also to develop more ethical responses. As such we are learning along the way. Feedback and suggestions whether specific or general are always welcome.)

2. Eligibility requirements for submitting to the opp journal

To be eligible for publication in the opp journal (and if you are submitting an unsolicited piece), the author will need to ensure that they are the legal owner of the piece, that the piece is original, and that the piece has not been published elsewhere. opp will be utilizing a double anonymous review process and prior publication will compromise this for unsolicited pieces. 

For solicited pieces, this anonymous review process may be waived. Solicited pieces may also be published elsewhere, or forthcoming elsewhere, BUT will be required to show proof that the first publisher will allow re-publication. 

There are no institutional affiliation requirements for submitting to the journal. 

3. Submitting your piece to the journal

If you meet the eligibility requirements, please prepare your writing sample according to these guidelines:

Length: opp does not require a certain length, but 1000 - 4000 is preferred. 

Editing by author: we encourage that authors take time to proofread their work, or even have others look over it prior to submission. This will help chances of acceptance to the journal as well as expedite the editing process. 

Pronouns: opp accepts any pronouns that the author may find reasonable or comfortable. The journal team asks that this remains consistent as far as possible for the nature of pieces. The singular use of “they/them” (with either singular or plural verbal and other grammatical agreements as preferred) is perfectly acceptable for the opp journal. 

Anonymizing the piece: please remove any content from your piece that might reveal your identity. This most often is most important with removing your name anywhere that it may appear. Please further consider any information that might reveal personal or identifying information upon publication and your desire to make this publicly available.

References/Citations: Since the opp journal lives online, endnotes and references that appear after the content are best. We do not prefer a certain citation style, but we do ask that it remains internally consistent. 

American vs. British English: We do not prefer either, but please remain consistent with whichever you choose. 

Preferred Style: 12 point font, 1 inch margins, clear title (title case) and (sub)headings (sentence case), double space.

4. What to expect after you submit to the opp Journal

The review procedure will first consist of checking a few details:

a. The piece clearly relates to a designated subtheme.

b. The author has anonymized their piece. 

If pieces do not meet these two criteria, they may be sent back to the author for resubmission or depending on submission load, they may be rejected. An opp team member who does not take part in editing rounds will maintain identity information about authors and ensure anonymous review among correct editors.

Acceptance + copyedit round: An initial anonymous review will be handled by subtheme specialists on our acceptance board, folks familiar with subtheme. The purpose of this review is to make sure that the piece is accessed for fit within the journal subtheme as well as first being read by someone familiar with the content. This review round is important so that we can maintain the integrity of the journal and ensure that the piece is looked over by someone with a level of understanding. 

This review round is also a first pass for copyediting. In addition to grammar, this includes editing for clarity and any adjustments for philosophical rigour if a piece is close enough to acceptance quality that we would prefer to suggest adjustments rather than reject a piece. Please know that we aim to change as little as possible with accepted pieces. We do not want to change the voice of the piece. It should, for the most part, speak for itself. 

We reserve the right at this point to reject a piece if the specialist editor feels that the piece does not actually fit the subtheme or any of our ethical publication principles. If the specialist editor determines that the piece is good for a subtheme, it will be sent to the second editor.

Copyedit round 2: After a successful first round, the piece is sent to a second editor for a final anonymous copy edit and read-through. Since this editor will not necessarily be a specialist for the subtheme, this round is especially important for readability. 

For clarity, our copy editing procedures look for consistencies and style in a number of areas including (but not limited to):

a. Grammar (verb agreement, punctuation, capitalization, pronoun use, etc.)

b. English use (consistent British or consistent American)

c. Clear headings and subheadings that use TITLE CASE for titles and SENTENCE CASE for (sub)headings. 

d. Wrong/misspelled words 

Please note: if authors prefer an alternative style or formatting, they should let the team know. We will consider each request in turn. 

Confirmation with author:

The transition between the 1st and 2nd rounds of copyediting is internal to opp. You will receive news of whether your piece has been accepted within 2 months of the submission deadline. Later, once your piece has been through both rounds of copyediting, we will contact you again to discuss any changes that have been suggested by our editors.

Upon both opp and the author(s) agreeing on any/all changes, the sample will be prepared for publication. If you want to further change anything, our editors will have to take another look. And, if you wish to remove a piece from consideration, you may also do that at this point if it has not already been requested. 

At this point, we will also ask for a biographical excerpt of 150 words or less to be included with your piece. Beyond name, other contents to include might be: other publications, institutional affiliation, any identity/affinity, hobbies, links to personal websites, philosophical specializations. etc. 

Please note: you may also choose to publish with opp anonymously, under a pseudonym, and/or without a biography.

Additionally, we will coordinate recording your piece at this point - whether by you, someone you know, or an opp team member per your preference. You will also be asked to agree to have the article published under our current licensing. 

-----------------------------------------

Timeline for review process: We are a team of volunteers committed to the responsible publishing of underrepresented philosophies, so please be patient. With that said, we expect the following timeline for most submissions: 

1. Notification of acceptance/rejection should be received within 2 months.

2. Notification of progression to round 2 OR notification of author revisions required within an additional month. Author revisions required for next step.

3. Publishing copy sent to author for final review within an additional month. 

4. Piece is ready to publish in the upcoming turn of opp journal. 

5. This process should hopefully not last more than 4-5 months!

guidelines for prose submissions to the journal

• Submissions for turn 2 will be open via a Google form until 11:59 GMT on 31.08.21. Submissions for turn 3 will open next year. 

• Out of pieces accepted for publication in the journal, some will be published “as is”, and others will be published on the condition of edits. In the case of the latter, a poetry editorial co-lead will introduce the poet to an editor from opp who will offer suggestions. The poet will be free to decline any suggestions, but should note that some edits may be required in order for opp to wish to proceed with the publication of the piece.

• For some pieces rejected for publication in the journal, a poetry editorial co-lead may reach out to the poet and ask whether they would like their work to be considered for publication on the opp blog. 

• All poems will be accompanied by a voice recording on the opp website. At time of submission, the poet will have the option to provide a voice recording (either done by them personally or by someone they know), else opp will arrange for a recording to be made. The poet’s choice here will not affect opp’s decision to publish or not publish their work. 

• If either the poet or opp no longer wishes to publish the poem, opp will not publish the poem.