DIALOGUES@RU EDITORIAL BOARD SPRING 2017 FALL 2017 Emily Bliss Kelly Allen Lingyi Chen Amy Barenboim Wendy Chen Dustin He Steven Land Wei Yen Heng Kimberly Livingston Devika Kishore Valerie Mayzelshteyn Jasminy Martinez Daphne Millard Shannon McIntyre Keoni Nguyen Michele Mesi Ilana Shaiman Kalina Nissen Chad Stewart Jillian Pastor Abigail Stroebel Kassandra Rhoads Yashi Yadav Syeda Saad Cheyenne Terry Aurora Tormey EDITORS Tracy Budd Lynda Dexheimer COVER DESIGN & TYPESETTING Mike Barbetta © Copyright 2017 by Dialogues@RU All rights reserved. Printed in U.S.A. ii. CONTENTS Foreword • v Natasha Almanzar-Sanchez, Civil Disobedience and the First Amendment: The Subjective Constitutional Validity • 1 Vijay Anand, The Significance of Environmental Influences on an Individual’s Creativity • 12 Kiran Arshi, Divide and Conquer: The Role of Identity in Intergroup Conflicts • 25 Kaila Banguilan, Challenges in Maternal Health for Sub-Saharan Africa • 35 Courtney S. Beard, Discrimination against the Transgender Population and Recommendations for a Trans-inclusive Environment in the U.S. Military • 44 Brian Chang, CRISPR: Genetic Therapy, Enhancement, and Why It Matters • 57 Emilia Dabek, Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs for Early Detection of Drug Abuse: A Better Prognosis and Higher Survival Rate • 67 Josh Finkelstein, Night-Walkers in the Neruons • 79 Danielle Heaney, “Best Used By”: Labeling the Blame for Consumer Level Food Waste in the United States • 91 Ralston Hough, A Legalized Evil: The Usefulness of Just War Theory in Contemporary Politics • 103 Amy Hu, The Role of Pharmacogenomics in Racialized Medicine • 117 Taylor Jones, Sexuality, Sexual Identification, and Success: The Troubles and Consequences of Choosing to Stay in or Come Out of the Closet • 131 iii. Marques Jules, Energy Drinks: Alcohol for the Youth? • 146 Koeun Kim, Queer-coded Villains (And Why You Should Care) • 156 Joon Lee, Conscious versus Gangster: An Evolving Relationship in Hip-Hop Activism • 166 Jennifer Lohf, Understanding Opposition to Nuclear Power as the Solution to the Energy Crisis • 178 Hunter Maenner, Perception Deficit: The Semiotics of Money and The True Impact of Campaign Contributions on American Politics • 190 Morgan Mohlmann, Prison Video Visitation: A Breakthrough in Technology or a Breakdown in Communication? • 202 Sarah E. Pakay, Gaining Insight into Psychological Disorders through Dreams • 213 Sonam Patel, Ethical Perspectives of Veganism • 227 Karina Pedetti, The Funny Thing About Depression: Using Humor to Cope • 239 Rebecca Pytell, More Than a Diet: The Struggles of Celiac Disease • 250 Komalpreet Saggu, Personal Bias Has No Place in Science • 260 Leandeline Tejada, Social Constructs in Prison: How Do Prison Guards Reinforce Heteronormativity Among Inmates in Prisons? • 271 Julia Wasilewski, An Anomaly: The Black Swan • 281 iii. iv. FOREWORD Rutgers University is notorious for its rigorous undergraduate writing courses. After completing the required Expository Writing, some students continue on to Research in the Disciplines, where they explore an aca- demic subject and ultimately choose their own topic for research. What results is an impressive collection of student-driven creativity as young writers investigate and analyze their findings in a 10-page essay. That’s a formal description. Reading the papers reveals a deeper, more thoughtful side of students making knowledge, perhaps for the first time in their college experience. The Writing Program at Rutgers offers research courses that range from the Psychology of Conflict to the Ethics of Food, from Conspiracy The- ories to Human Ecology. Other topics include feminism, medicine, film, propaganda, graphic novels, taboos, and family. Each semester, instruc- tors provide background, theory, and the research skills needed to launch an exploration. However, it is the student who determines her argument and the trajectory the essay will follow. The authors of the best papers are invited to submit their work to Dialogues@RU. This volume contains some outstanding research on video-visitation in prisons, media repre- sentations of queer villains, and maternal health in sub-Saharan Africa. Timely topics are also represented in essays on food waste, CRISPR gene therapy, and the limits of free speech in protest. The essays appearing in this journal reflect another step in the Writing Program’s course sequence—editing, publishing, and presentation. All submissions are selected and edited by students enrolled in the Editing Internship. Volume 12 included an initial pool of more than 200 research papers. Some authors go further and submit their work to the Undergrad- uate Research Writing Conference at Rutgers. This scholarly gathering provides an opportunity for writers to showcase their work in panel dis- cussions and individual presentations. The entire event is organized and overseen by students in the Editing and Conference Planning Internship. From conception to execution, revision to publication and presentation, writing at Rutgers is student-centered. My thanks go to the wonderful team of interns who worked tirelessly on substantive and technical edits. Without their thorough comments v. and proofing, this journal would not happen. Many thanks also go to colleagues in the Writing Program who helped with selections and final reads. A big shout out to Lynda Dexheimer, Research in the Disciplines Coordinator, Writing Program Associate Director, URWC overlord, and all-around marvel. Scholarly journals reserved for undergraduate writing are rare, and ones focused on analytical composition and research even more so. For this, much gratitude goes to the Rutgers University Depart- ment of English for their continued support of such an important publi- cation. Finally, congratulations and thanks to all the authors in Volume 12. Your essays are now published scholarly work. Tracy Budd Editor, Dialogues@RU Assistant Teaching Professor Rutgers Writing Program vi. Civil Disobedience and the First Amendment: The Subjective Constitutional Validity — By NATASHA ALMANZAR-SANCHEZ ABSTRACT The United States was founded by consecutive acts of civil disobedi- ence, the Boston Tea Party being the most prominent example. Since then, civil disobedience has been used continuously in social movements like Civil Rights and Anti-War. Despite the historical influence civil disobedience has had in American history, it remains a controversial topic because it involves the act of law-breaking in order to express a thought or position to denounce a government act or law. Exploring the constitutionality of civil disobedi- ence as a form of speech will determine its place in the eyes of the law. The case of United States v. Eberhardt, the rising use of electronic civil disobedi- ence, and the current surge of social tensions will be addressed in correla- tion with both the First Amendment and civil disobedience to establish a concrete argument. INTRODUCTION The term “civil disobedience” is relatively contemporary for something that is a historically recurring event. Henry Thoreau, a 19th century philosopher, historian, and one of the first individuals to address civil disobedience, offers the interpretation that individual resistance against established government is a natural right that prevents over- bearing state control; “[government] has not the vitality and force of a single man; for a single man can bend it to his will” (Thoreau 7). The government is not run by a single man, therefore it cannot have a singu- lar perspective toward anything, including civil disobedience. What is the relationship between civil disobedience and the First Amendment? Is it protected or illegal? Per Thoreau, “Why has every man a conscience, then?... We should be men first, and subjects afterward... All men recog- nize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and endurable” (Thoreau 11, 17). Morality, in prominent occasions in history, has been what motivated people to stand up against the political system. The colonists thought, “Hey this isn’t right,” when Great Britain enforced the quartering of soldiers in their homes in the 1700s, and what average citizens and slaves thought throughout the two centuries of longstanding slavery. 1 The law dictating that something is just does not mean that the public should automatically trust that judgment. In fact, in 2015, only 15% of Americans trusted the government always/most the time (PEW Research Center). Challenging the law is a decision each American can make if they feel that the governing power is not serving in the interest of justice, especially in today’s hectic political climate. If Americans do not attempt to defend civil disobedience, then they risk losing a very valu- able form of free speech and allow the government to silence a form of criticism. Thoreau’s theory of morally objecting to government through individual resistance will be applied to the overlaps in modern social movements like Black Lives Matter to historical civil disobedience like the Civil Rights Movement and to the new issue of civil disobedience on the internet. But beforehand, to explore the relationship between civil dis- obedience and the First Amendment, the definition of civil disobedience must be established to eliminate any ambiguity. Then the cases explored will make determining the validity of the civil disobedience constitutional claim in today’s scope a more accurate investigation. Ultimately,