The Society for Invertebrate Pathology records contain documents relating to the founding of the society, society publications, papers and records belonging to society members, photographs, meeting and seminar materials, and interview recordings. The full finding aid is available online.

If you're interested in viewing the full collection, please contact Special Collections to set up an appointment at x52353 or speccoll@umbc.edu. We also hold open research hours on Monday through Friday, 1pm to 4pm, with additional hours from 4pm to 8pm Thursday nights.

In a 4-day Model African Union (AU) summit at Howard University on February 19-22, 2015, 7 UMBC students will serve as ambassadors of the West African country of Togo under the mentorship of Dr. Gloria Chuku. The students will have the opportunity to meet the real ambassador of Togo in Washington, DC for more information/briefing on the country, be addressed by the AU ambassador to the United States, participate in Council and Committee sessions, and at the end receive certificates of participation and awards in addition to 3 credit units in Independent Study in AFST 211: Contemporary Africa or AFST 213: Africa, Culture and Development.

Walk In Advising Hours February 9th-13th
Got a question? Stop on by! 

Monday, February 9th
10am-11:30am and 1:30pm-3pm

Tuesday, February 10th
10am-11:30am and 1:30pm-3pm

Wednesday, February 11th
10am-11:30am and 1:30pm-3pm

Thursday, February 12th
10am-11:30am and 1:30pm-3pm

Friday, February 13th
10am-11:30am

Advisors are also available by appointment.

Dear Artists,

Photo c/o  The Nib

Writer and Journalist Jonathan Chait thinks the police are out of control… the language police that is.

He sets out to police the word cops in a recent article “how the language police are perverting liberalism”.

Chait claims Political correctness has run amok. He pours scorn on many citing examples like the hashtag “solidarity is for white women“, the term “mansplaining”, the increased usage of trigger warnings,  or the heightened discussions on microagressions. Chait thinks that the pressure to be PC oppresses the oppressed and castrates the discourse both within and between groups.

But political correctness is not a rigorous commitment to social equality so much as a system of left-wing ideological repression. Not only is it not a form of liberalism; it is antithetical to liberalism. Indeed, its most frequent victims turn out to be liberals themselves

Liberal victims?  

Chait serves as an example one of the most visible groups on the internet: Feminists…and some of them agree with him.

#FemFuture was organized to celebrate the mobilizing power of online feminism. It sought to write an inclusive report on what the movement had accomplished and discuss future approaches. Unfortunately,  other erstwhile allies had PC objections with the report and a backlash (elaborated on and commentated on here) soon resulted. 

But was this really political correctness gone wrong? Or just a healthy debate? 

Some think Chaits assertions have created as an opportunity to reiterate and clarify what being PC truly means -and what it means when people dismiss it as censorship or over-sensitivity. 

But not everyone is enthralled with Chait’s take on the PC problem.

Brittany Cooper of Salon remarks that his attempts to side with and “rescue” white and martyred feminists comes across, at best patronizing, and at worst chauvinistic and racist.  And what have the supposed victims of PC Speech have to say about Chait?   Samhita Mukhopadhyay wrote her own response article, 

…But the current political climate has made it such that when one airs racist, sexist or homophobic views, there are consequences. Rights don’t exempt us from consequences. Those consequences should, of course, never be deadly, but if one becomes the object of social ridicule for being racist or sexist, so be it.

 So, we come back to our original question: Does political correctness stifle creativity? Science actually says no. In fact, it helps by creating a more inclusive and conducive atmosphere. 

The semester starts anew, and the Bioethics Debates Committee (a partnership between the Biology Council of Majors and Philosophers Anonymous) begins to organize another semester’s worth of B-Ethical debates. While the committee works hard to make the debates possible, we ask you to join us as we contemplate some big questions in the field of bioethics:

As robotic technologies excel and as our knowledge of the brain expands, the ethical questions of brain-computer interfaces become an inevitable subject of serious discussion. Many contemplate how such devices might infringe on rights to privacy or how they might create a Gattaca-style social stratification between those who are enhanced and those who are not.

Biomedical engineers have developed robotic arms and other prosthetics that can be controlled by one’s mind. If we can already create devices that can be controlled by brains, is it reasonable to be concerned about a future of brains being controlled by devices?

Other controversial topics abound in the domain of reproductive rights. To what extent is it ethical for a government to provide access to contraceptives, police its population size, or permit the parent’s selection of genetic traits to be passed down to offspring?

Earlier this week, a law allowing three-parent babies was approved by the House of Commons in the UK. This technique would allow thousands of UK babies to be born free of mitochondrial disease. The United Kingdom will be the first country to allow three-parent babies, provided that the legislation passes through the House of Lords.

Genetic engineering in the future may provide hope to some parents that their children may be born free of disease, but what about diseases and injuries acquired after birth? Some people think that stem cells may pave the future in regards to treatments for countless afflictions, but many religious groups oppose the idea of using embryonic cells in order to enhance the lives of adults.

The public has argued for a long time on the issue of stem cell research, but biologists have recently triumphed forward with induced pluripotent cells (iPCs). These cells originate from adult tissues and are manipulated to behave like embryonic tissues in that they have the ability to differentiate into other cell types. Does the creation of iPCs completely nullify the question of embryonic stem cell research?

Finally, many philosophers and scientists have long entertained the positions of religion and science. Some people claim that one precludes the other as science pursues “evidence-based beliefs” and religion pursues “faith-based beliefs”. They assume that the two domains are antithetical in nature.

However, minister and physics professor Paul Wallace claims that it is possible to reconcile science and religion because the two bodies use “different languages”. Extending this metaphor, Wallace claims that the two can exist together as long as we use “careful translation”. Does Wallace’s claim hold and, moreover, is it unethical for scientists to discourage religious thinking alongside scientific thinking?

Bioethics truly touches many fields: biology, philosophy, health policy, theology, and computer science, to name a few. As such, we expect many students in UMBC to be interested with our debates, and we invite professors, graduate students, physicians, priests, political activists, innovators, scholars, and many other professionals to speak at our debates.

This semester, B-Ethical will host four debates with experts in the fields briefly mentioned earlier. These events are open to the entire campus. You can expect pizza, intriguing conversation, and a way to network with other students and faculty interested in bioethics. All we ask is that you bring your friends and some tough questions. Stay tuned for more information about future debates!

Isn’t life grand!

Join fellow UMBC colleagues, alumni, and guests for an elegant evening filled with jazz, excellent company, delicious food, and fine wine. Your attendance and participation in the silent auction will benefit the Alumni Association Scholarship for current UMBC students. For more information about the event and to register for tickets, click here.

If you are interested in becoming an event sponsor or donating items for the silent auction, please contact Jessica El-Zeftawy ’08, ’12 in the Office of Alumni Relations at jbard1@umbc.edu or by calling 410-455-1678.

Please note: early-bird pricing ends February 28.

*Due to the weather, this event has been rescheduled for Wednesday, February 18 at 7.30 p.m. in the UC Ballroom. 

Best known for her viral parody video of racial microaggressions, Shit White Girls Say…to Black Girls, comedian and vlogger Franchesca Ramsey discusses her approach to harnessing the power of social media across multiple platforms in order to engage in meaningful dialogues about social justice. Inspired by her interactions with other prominent social justice bloggers, Ramsey critiques the toxic “call-out culture” that pervades many social justice communities and explores alternative approaches to demanding accountability in online spaces. Her poignant video, How Slut Shaming Becomes Victim Blaming, which centers on her analysis of rape culture and its impact on the literal and metaphorical safe space for women and sexual assault survivors, provides the touch point for examining the role of vulnerability and raw affect in social justice work. Ramsey further explores the possibilities and challenges presented by using new media to talk about contentious issues like race, feminism, and body politics.

She will join us for Critical Social Justice on Wednesday, Feb. 18th at 7:30pm in the UC Ballroom to help promote our theme of Creating Brave Spaces during the week of Feb 16-20th.

Sponsored by the Women’s Center, Student Life’s Mosaic Center, and the Dresher Center for the Humanities (as part of the Spring 2015 Humanities Forum). For information on Critical Social Justice week and its sponsors: critsocjustice.wordpress.com