Board of Education Investigates Chromosome “Homolog Agenda” in Biology Curriculums

—Grant Wood, American Gothic painter

In This Issue

Phyisicists

The Mq Goes To The Year 1023

News In Brief

CHINA CLAIMS BALLOON ORIGINATED FROM “LARGE BIRTHDAY PARTY”

BY MILLIE YOU Ass. Graphics Editor

Despite its widespread acceptance as part of a standard biology curriculum, parents and politicians alike are mounting increasing hostilities against the subject of homologous chromosomes being taught at UC San Diego.

“This saucy biology calls for the total separation of these homosomes from the classroom,” said a leader of the opposition. The recent surge in anxiety has been attributed to homologs being “joined at the centromere,” leading to a widespread belief of “suspicious pelvic activity.”

This sentiment is not held among biologists. “To be very blunt, homologs are an eighthgrade concept. You don’t even need to cover them in detail in class,” said UCSD genetics professor Paul Ru. “Basically, they’re chromosome pairs. One is from the maternal side, the other the paternal, and they pair up for cell division. That’s it. I don’t see what the fuss is about. Some people are doing too much.”

“It’s … I don’t know,” pondered Ben Sharp, 32. “I just don’t know. They’re so entangled, body and soul. Surely there’s some — exchange — happening there.”

The exchange, experts say, merely has to do with genes.

“In an event we call crossing over, these homologous pairs swap some parts of their genetic material,” explains Violet Chalkee, a researcher focused on cell division at UCSD.

However, this clarification only seems to have incensed opposition. “Leave it to snowflake scientists to describe something lewd as ‘crossing over’ and ‘genetic material,’” one blog post read.

“What kind of slang term is chiasma? Are biology curriculums really using this type of wording to describe sex positions?” another post demanded. “Well, biologists can chiasma in the privacy of their own homes, but not in front of my kids!”

“This post-modern neoMarxist, critical race theory offshoot of a curriculum has done enough damage to schools everywhere. Enough is enough,” said a formal statement penned by Peter Jordan, an avid protestor of the “homolog agenda.” “Homologous metaphase is unnatural; swapping of fluids — ahem, genetic exchange — is meant for man and woman. This agenda shall NOT triumph over the righteousness of parenthood. They shall not ruin our children!”

“I’m literally an adult, Dad. Please stop, you’re embarrassing me,” Jenny Jordan, 19, posted an hour later. She later commented, “I think we can acknowledge here that they’re freaking out about the word ‘homo,’ which is so juvenile that it’s almost funny. It doesn’t mean anything except that homologous chromosomes are, well — homologous!”

“We’re biologists. We study this in great detail for many years,” protested Will Moon, a member of the National Biologist Coalition. “This is an extremely targeted campaign from an extremely small population of very loud, misinformed, and paranoid people. Please. We are talking about chromosomes here. This is what they’re supposed to do! They can’t help it!”

UCSD has released a statement addressing the conflict.

“As always, UCSD is committed to an inclusive and fair campus that does not tolerate the discrimination of new ideas, especially movements from minority groups,” an announcement read on Tuesday.

“The board is working closely with this minority to resolve concerns about the curriculum. We see you, we hear you, and we are learning.”

UCSD’s response has been met with mixed views. “I think everyone is being way too facetious. It’s not complicated,” said an anonymous counter-protester of the antihomolog agenda movement. “Some people are depressed and horny and try to ruin it for everyone else. I mean, really. If you can’t get laid, don’t make it my problem. I get blue-balled all the time! You don’t see me raving against ‘genetic exchange’ between men and women!”