Rough draft second paper

According to Conflict Theory, any frenzy caused by cannibalism is indicative of the society’s views of morality and disgust. Because cannibalistic societies had conditioned their citizens to find pleasure in devouring or mournfully eating victims, those people, although some were physically stricken by the Kuru disease, were not mentally damaged. Because this was a social norm, Conflict Theory played no role in this situation with these people. However, in American society a man was convicted of murder, not because the evidence of the trial pointed to homicide, but because he openly admitted that he had resorted to cannibalism to survive. Conflict theory argues that all types of cannibalism are unacceptable in American society. Through this case study and the previous one, we can see how fact can be skewed into abominable fictional legends. Hype around these scenarios always entailed mass hysteria. Emotion becomes dominant over reason, and conflict is elevated to scapegoating as the situation becomes “popularized” by the news. J.S Kidd argued that during the 1970’s, “cannibalism –an exotic topic to begin with…entered the same set as Bigfoot, the Bermuda Triangle, and flying saucers” (Kidd 5). The media devoured those who survived in the Andes like it convicted Alfred Packer in the 1880’s.