I think that prior to responding to your question I need you to
re-read the post you took it from. The first paragraph summarizes
Lorber's premise, and the second paragraph forms the logical
extension vis-a-vis the response of societal institutions to a
transgressive act.
Most people who have read Lorber have a strong reactions to her work,
but she is widely acknowledged as a formidable intellect, with an
impressive editorial and academic resume--throwing around terms like
'conspiracy theorist' seems a shallow, almost knee-jerk response to
her work.
Kathryn Aegis