We look forward to articles which present or propose a unique perspective which go beyond the run-of-the-mill mechanical analysis of vital LGBTQIA+ issues. We would also prefer articles which do not shy away from challenging the status quo whilst standing for the best interests of the LGBTQIA+.


  • We invite submissions from professionals, practitioners, academicians, experts and undergraduate/post-graduate students from various streams and areas of study.

  • The word limit should preferably be between 1000-1300.

  • The authors must not put any of their personal information in the write up.

  • Co-authorship of up to two authors is allowed.


  • Plagiarism of any degree will not be tolerated.  

  • Write ups with a similarity of more than 15% would be rejected.


  • An abstract would be required along with the submitted draft. The said abstract must be put in the body of email and should not exceed 250 words.

  • The abstract should be a brief and concise embodiment of the draft submitted.


  • A uniform method of citation with a table of references attached at the end of the write up is suggested.

  • Hyperlinked sources would be preferred.


  • Submissions must be in Times New Roman, Font size 12, Line Spacing 1.5, Justified, paragraph spacing 12 pt. after.

  • Quotations exceeding 40 words must be indented 1.5 cm to the left, Font size 11, Line Spacing 1.0, Justified, No quotes.

  • A maximum of three level headings are allowed.


  • The write up must be e-mailed at carpal.submissions@gmail.com

  • Subject of the email should be titled “CARPAL Blog”.

  • Name of the document containing the write up must be “Write up-Name of the Author”.

  • All the submissions must be made in .doc or .docx format.

  • A separate document mentioning author’s Name, Year of study/designation, Institute, contact information, and link of LinkedIn profile (if any) should be sent. The said document should be titled as “Cover Letter”.


  • If published, the Centre would retain all the copyrights of the write up and the moral rights will vest with the author(s).

  • If selected for publication, the author(s) must submit an undertaking mentioning that the work is original and unpublished.


  • Contingent on the number of submissions received by us, we would attempt to get back to your submissions in 10-15 days.

Parameters for review (technical and substantive)

  1. Coherency in thought and argument. (This is a substantive parameter which can be made out from the structure as well as how the content connects to make overall sense.)

  2. Lucidity in the argument or proposition put forth. (This is a substantive parameter which can be made out from ease in comprehensibility of the content)

  3. Structure of content. (This is a technical parameter closely linked with cohesion. It can be made out from how well the content flows in an organised manner)

  4. Grammar (This is a self-explanatory technical parameter) (Grammarly is a great tool for this)

  5. Contribution to literature (This is a substantive parameter which is more research oriented. It can be made out by analysing whether the article has contributed to the existing body of literature and if the answer lies in the affirmative, then a further question of how the content has contributed to the existing body of literature is to be asked. Contribution can be on any scale from merely reorganising or refreshing literature to pioneering a new avenue by using the existing body of literature. Having said that, contribution of any magnitude is significant in its own right)

  6. Contemporary Relevance (This should be viewed as a technical parameter in the sense that the content should not be rendered moot by time or age. Pressing issues are always preferable. However, niche, important underlying issues not in vogue should not be discarded at the cost of contemporary relevance)

  7. Citation and formatting (These are a technical parameter which is self-explanatory. The only points worth mentioning are that citation should be uniform and proper and formatting as per our specifications)



The acceptance or rejection of the articles is based on these parameters. In particular, greater reliance must be placed on the substantive parameters while technical parameters should hold a relatively ancillary value. Therefore, an article must always be substantively evaluated and technically edited within the aforementioned parameters. The point of editing is not to completely overhaul but to smoothen rough edges. 

Love photo created by freepik - www.freepik.com