By: Ashwathi Menon, Bioinformatics & Public Health Major

When I first entered the world of neuroscience lab work, science seemed to be all about being objective: clean lines, sharp corners, and no emotion involved whatsoever. It all seemed to point to the notion that too much emotion clouds one’s vision; you didn’t want emotion near your microscope. But as I stood at my lab bench operating my RT-PCRs on rat hypothalamus samples, it hit me just how much emotion was already infused into everything we did. It takes patience to accurately pipette one perfect microliter of liquid. It takes collaboration to run repeated tests. It takes the knowledge and obligation to know your own scientific pursuits may one day impact an individual’s life; the entire point being care is not the opposite of science but its pulse instead.

This is not something one can read in books or lectures. It is something my grandmother taught me: my Achamma. She suffered from a stroke just over a year ago, and since then, I have been assisting my family with her care. Watching her relearn to move her arm or to pronounce a few words sparked my own interest in the same paths inside her mind because these paths looked just like what we discussed and viewed in class, but instead of graphs or PowerPoint presentations, they were hers.

In science, we’re expected to measure everything: voltage, pH levels, and reaction time. But there is no measuring the act of holding someone’s hand while they forget your name, or the strength required to continue to come back to them anyway. This is the kind of labor women have always done. Unacknowledged labor, uncounted labor, but vital labor nonetheless. It is this kind of labor, the kind of labor devalued by society as care, that fuels scientific progress itself. This is one thing feminism helped me recognize.

As someone who works in scientific research, I have been struck by how often science attempts to polarize emotion and intellect. You’re legitimate if you’re logical, but weak if you’re empathetic. But beyond just hurting women in science, this kind of false dichotomy also hurts science itself. The questions we ask in scientific research come from who we are. When more women, and especially women of color, enter science, we bring questions that have never before been asked.

One thing feminist theory often addresses is “ethics of care,” because care is not something to be scorned but rather something to do with moral and intellectual power. This is what I think of every time I go to lab work. This is what I do every time I label a vial of cells or give a presentation or stand up to talk about my findings: practice care for my field and help to transform it from something that once made me feel small to something that contains care.

When I first embarked on my research internship at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, I noticed that I was among the youngest individuals in the lab setting. And yes, I recall wondering whether my voice would really carry any weight or whether anyone would take me seriously at all. But every time I decided to speak out or share my thoughts on whether to use this or that approach, I realized that confidence didn’t lie in being loud but in being anchored to my values instead. And this is something feminism showed me before science did.

It is to walk a high wire between precision and patience, between brains and intuition, and between being strong and being soft. But it seems to me now that these things are no longer on one side or the other of any kind of divide. The most excellent scientific minds happen to approach things whole-brained or whole-hearted, asking “who” questions. Who is helped? Who is hurt? Who is not being allowed to participate in this conversation?

At times, I wonder what my Achamma would have thought if she were to witness me now in my lab setting, my gloved hands steady and strong around my work involving data and fluorescence. But she would smile and remark matter-of-factly, “You’re still taking care of people.” And she would be right because science is nothing but another expression of “caring for others” or our “world” around us.

Perhaps care itself is not what serves as a distraction from science but is rather what makes science human. Perhaps future generations of women pursuing science can forget having to choose between being kind and being smart because we have always been both.

By Claudia Gerry, Social Work Major, Critical Sexuality Studies Minor

It was sixth grade, I was in health class, we were in the family life unit. All my classmates could not stop laughing. My teacher had enough of the shenanigans, she made us all stand up and scream, “PENIS” then, “VAGINA” then, “BOOBIES”. I did not understand why it was so funny. Growing up, my mom, a family practice doctor, would read me her medical textbooks to sleep. I was learning biological male anatomy to sleep. I learned how babies were made when I was 5, I simply asked my mom, and she told me, without innuendos, without slang terms, but with her medical textbook. I was always taught medically accurate sex education at home. This luxury is not given to everyone. In my middle school, there was no LGBTQIA+ representation built into our curriculum. Once again, I learned about it at home. I was raised to believe that sex is just a natural part of life, but I must also know how to have safe sex. Not everyone’s parents are as open as mine were, sex education is needed for the safety of everyone. 

The Netherlands and America differ greatly in how they address teenage sexuality, which is very obvious when looking at statistics. American teens, in the industrialized world, have some of the highest rates of STDs. American teen girls are twice more likely to carry a pregnancy to term than they are to receive an abortion. This is most likely due to the stigma surrounding abortion in the US and the lack of factual education about it. Compared to American girls, Dutch girls are less likely to get pregnant and also more likely to have an abortion if pregnant. American teen girls are 4 times as likely to get pregnant, and twice as likely to have an abortion compared to their Dutch counterparts, even though their age of sexual initiation is similar. This is likely due to a lack of education on contraception methods in American schools and homes. Americans heavily stigmatize sexuality, especially for adolescents; they are less likely to educate their children about safe sex practices in the home. This is why sex education in schools is so important.  Dutch youth birth rates are 8 times lower than American youth. Dutch abortion rates are two times lower than the American abortion rates. While the age of sexual initiation for Dutch teens got younger, their birth rate also steeply dropped between the 1970s-1996, it is one of the lowest in the world. Dutch Teens have much lower rates of pregnancy, birth, abortion, and HIV among youth than American teens. 

The book “Not Under My Roof: Parents, Teens, and the Culture of Sex” by Amy T. Schalet is about the comparison of attitudes of adolescent sexuality in the United States and the Netherlands. I read this book for my CSST 332 Sex and Society class. Schalet is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Schalet’s findings are based on interviews and knowledge about each country’s government and laws. She interviews 130 Dutch and American parents and adolescents (mostly 10th graders) between early 1990 and 2000 who are all similar in education level, religion, class and race, and asks them a series of questions. The main question asked is, as a parent, “would you allow your adolescent child to have a sleepover with the opposite [gender**]?”, or as an adolescent, “would your parent allow you to have a sleepover with the opposite [gender**].?” We find that the answers vary depending on the country, but why? The book explores and explains teenage sexuality in the United States and the Netherlands, mostly in relation to family.  

In the Netherlands, teenage sexuality is seen as normal. Dutch culture normalizes sexuality through three cultural frames: normal sexuality, relationship based sexuality, and self regulated sexuality. Normal sexuality refers to the fact that sexuality can be talked about in an open, unproblematic, and matter of fact manner. Relationship based sexuality refers to the idea that sexual desire and sexual acts grow out of a teen’s feelings for and relationship with another person. Finally, Self-regulated sexuality refers to the belief that readiness for sex is a moment when emotional and physical desires are united, and sensible preventative measures are taken. Sex is talked about in the home like any other topic. There is also an emphasis on safe sex coming from social institutions as well, so Dutch teens are getting the same message from multiple sources. Independent individualism is the dominant cultural norm in the Netherlands. Schalet uses the examples of alcohol, adulthood, and authority when explaining types of individualism. In the Netherlands, alcohol is socially embedded, which leads to teens developing internal control. To be an adult, they need to be able to financially and emotionally self regulate, and authority means to reach mutual agreements. Dutch parents use a form of control over their children called control through connection. Dutch parents tend to use mutual agreements instead of American overt displays of power, making many Dutch adolescents agree to the restrictions placed on them. But, sometimes Dutch teens still feel like their parents are being too restrictive, so they will do things in stiekem (secret). The Dutch societal system has much more room for error compared to America, they have second chances to finish high school, easy access to abortion and emergency contraception, less risk of drunk driving due to the fact that they bike everywhere, and there are fewer legal sanctions surrounding alcohol and drugs. This extra room for error allows Dutch parents to not have to worry as much as their American peers if their children veer off the normalized course of life.

In the United States, teenage sexuality is dramatized. There are 3 frames that support the dramatization of teenage sexuality in the United States, Hormone-based sexuality, the battle between the sexes, and parent-regulated adolescent sexuality. Hormone-based sexuality, also referred to as raging hormones, refers to the idea that hormones are an overpowering force that teens cannot control, leaving parents to think there is a disjunction between the onset of hormones and the cognitive/emotional development needed to control them. The battle between the sexes refers to the fact that sex at adolescence is conceptualized as a battle with winners and losers, and costs and benefits. Lastly, parent-regulated adolescent sexuality refers to the fact that parents think it is their job to monitor and control their teen’s raging hormones because they cannot control themselves, they regulate whatever is in their control, for example, the not under my roof sentiment. American parents avoid the topic of sexuality in the home, leaving it to the school to teach, but the sex education legislation fails its students. Every state has different standards for sex education, some states do not even require the information being taught to be medically accurate. Some parents want to avoid the topic of sexuality in their children’s lives so much that they opt out of the school sex education provided. Adversarial individualism is the dominant cultural norm in the United States. In this form of individualism, teens need external control in relation to alcohol, to be an adult they need to be financially and emotionally self-sufficient, and authority means to win the important battles and let go of the small things. American parents use a form of control over their children called connection through control. American adolescents try to maintain a good kid image for their parents, yet they break the stricter rules to create separation between themselves and their families.

Overall, through reading this book, I learned that the American view of teenage sexuality is not the norm for the rest of the world, specifically the Netherlands.  I think the main ideas of the book are things all parents should know. We see that Dutch unintended pregnancy and STI rates are lower than their US counterparts, and that the Dutch tend to get married and stay married instead of getting multiple divorces like many Americans. I believe that parents should try their best to use the parenting style the Dutch use. Not only for a closer family dynamic, but for the safety and success of their children. 

I always knew that I was raised differently than my peers, but just because I was educated in this way doesn’t mean that the culture I live in had no effect on me. I was raised to ask questions and be open about sexuality, but around the age of 12, I began to keep things secret from my family and close myself off. Even though I was raised similarly to Dutch youth, I still act similarly to my American peers. This shows how important culture is. My parents raised me to be open, but I closed myself off because that was what everyone else my age was doing and was what I would see on TV. I experienced sexual trauma when I was a tween and went through it alone because that’s what my culture made me think was normal. My sex education in school did not emphasize enthusiastic consent and did not give us resources for help. Sex education is now one of my passions. I think every person should know their bodies and understand consent completely. I believe that if we as a society can open up about the human experience of sexuality, people would feel safer talking about their stories, have better sexual experiences, and overall be happier.

**This book was really eye-opening, but my main critique is the use of gendered language and the disregard of nonbinary/gender-nonconforming individuals. I tried my best to use the most inclusive language possible, but that cannot make up for the lack of data given, most likely due to this work being published in 2011 and there not being much research done on that community.

Citation

Schalet, A. T. (2011). Not under my roof : parents, teens, and the culture of sex. University Of Chicago Press.

Drop by Commons 308 for a bowl of cereal or breakfast bar!

We have 

• Fruit Loops

• Cap'N Crunch

• Cinnamon Toast Crunch

• Frosted Flakes

• Nature Valley Bars

• Nutrigrain Fruit Bars

Sanjana Srimath is a senior Biological Sciences (B.S.) major with a minor in Bioinformatics & Computational Biology graduating in December 2025. She is a member of the Honors College and a Merck Fellow. 

Mentors: Dr. Daniel Lobo (PI) and Dr. Andrew Wolff

Title of your research project: Integrating Gene Ontology Enrichment and Expression Profiling to Understand the Genetic Mechanisms of Planarian Fissioning

Describe your project: In my project, I study how planarian worms form fission planes - the locations where they split to reproduce asexually. Although planarians are well known for their incredible regenerative abilities, the genetic mechanisms that guide fissioning are still unclear. To investigate this, I use a systems biology approach that combines RNA-seq data, computational pipelines, and gene ontology enrichment analysis. I built scripts that automatically retrieve GO annotations, filter differentially expressed genes, and identify biological processes and molecular functions that are specifically enriched during fission. I also analyze how these genes behave across the anterior-posterior axis by generating expression profile plots for both fissioning and non-fissioning worms. Together, this helps me identify potential candidate genes and understand how they fit into a larger regulatory network that may control fission behavior. Ultimately, my work contributes to a framework for uncovering the molecular mechanisms behind planarian fissioning.

How did you find this research opportunity? I found this research opportunity by cold emailing Dr. Lobo after my first year at UMBC. At the time, I was doing neurobiology wet lab work at UMSOM but wanted to shift toward computational and systems biology to align with my minor. After meeting with Dr. Lobo, I joined the lab and began working under my mentor, Dr. Andrew Wolff, who has guided me through both wet lab and computational research. The lab has been incredibly supportive, which made my transition into computational work much smoother and helped me grow as both a learner and a researcher.

What was the hardest or most unexpected part about your research? The hardest part of my research was transitioning from the wet lab to the computational aspect, especially learning to write scripts in programming languages like Python and R. I also found presenting my work challenging at first, since effectively communicating data in posters required a different set of skills than lab work. I didn't set high expectations for whether I would lead my own project or assist my mentor, but this experience has taught me how to work independently while benefiting from the incredible support of Dr. Lobo, Dr. Wolff, and other lab members. So far, I've shared my research through multiple poster presentations at both URCAD and ABRCMS, which helped me improve both my scientific communication and presentation skills. I was also honored to receive a poster award at ABRCMS in San Antonio in November 2025, which made it rewarding to see my hard work pay off.

What is your advice to other students about getting involved in research? One of my favorite quotes is, "The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall" (Nelson Mandela). My advice to other students is to stay persistent and don't be afraid to reach out to PIs, even if it feels intimidating at first. Research is full of challenges and mistakes, but each setback is a learning opportunity. Work towards small, achievable goals and take time to appreciate the progress you make along the way. I also encourage exploring different areas - like wet lab, computational, clinical, etc. - so you can discover what facet truly excites you!

What are your career goals? I aspire to become a physician. After graduating from UMBC, I plan to apply to and attend medical school, where I hope to combine my passion for science, research, and patient care to make a meaningful impact in healthcare.

Hey Retrievers 

Are you looking for a meaningful way to give back to our community? Join Retriever Essentials! We're a student-staff-faculty partnership dedicated to supporting food access on campus — and right now we need volunteers to help make a difference. 

Why It Matters

• Retriever Essentials provides free groceries, toiletries, baby supplies, and meal swipes to any UMBC community member who needs them. 

• Food insecurity among college students is real. Having access to nutritious meals and essentials supports students' physical and mental health, and helps ensure they can focus on their studies. 

What You Can Do

• Volunteer at the "Essential Space" free-store, help with food distribution, or support events like our Free Farmers' Market. 

• Help spread the word, donate items if you can, or contribute by supporting meal-swipe sharing. 

Getting involved is easy — just sign up via this link: Meal Recovery Sign-Up Sheet.

Every bit of help counts. Let's come together as a UMBC community to make sure no Retriever has to worry about their next meal.

Visit Retriever Essentials myUMBC page for more info!

Thanks & Go Retrievers!

Getting ready to move out or just doing some spring cleaning? Consider donating your gently used items to the Retriever Re-Store, UMBC's move out donation collection program that aims to redistribute the items to other students who can give them a new life!

Donate items such as:

Kitchen appliances 

School supplies

Small furniture 

Desk organizers

Decorative items

Arts + Crafts 

Pots/pans and dishes

Mirrors

Non perishable food items

and more! 

At this time, we will NOT accept clothing, bedding, or items that should be trashed.

You can find donation collection bins near your RA desk in each residence hall, the ACC lobby, and Walker clubhouse starting today, December 8th through the close of the residence halls! Shop for free from collected donations at the Retriever Re-Store pop up shop in Upper Flat Tuesdays.

Want to drop off donations directly to the store? Schedule a drop off appointment with us via email at sustainability@umbc.edu

Help us divert waste from the landfill and redistribute pre-loved goods for free among our campus community! Email the Office of Sustainability at sustainability@umbc.edu with any concerns or questions.

Take a break from finals mode and join OGSL tomorrow for our last Grad Retriever Breakfast of the semester! You've worked so hard these past few months—papers, projects, late-night study sessions, all of it—and you deserve a warm, comforting start to your morning.

We'll have a cozy spread of breakfast sandwiches, seasoned potatoes, and assorted fruit juices (see flyer for full menu!) to give you the fuel you need to power through finals week.

Come cozy up with us, grab some breakfast, breathe for a minute, and celebrate everything you've accomplished this fall. 

Follow OGSL on myUMBC so you never miss an update or event!