本文以克莉斯提娃「賤斥」的觀點來檢視考夫曼「拉瑞米計畫」一劇，並試圖說明其理論架構之運用是否有助於釐清實際謀殺（殺人背後的動機）跟後續計畫之間的關係。雖然克莉斯提娃「賤斥」的概念能用來解釋實際犯罪的狀況，但因劇本所採用的形式與呈現方式，而令人無法全然理解作品本身。同時，劇本內缺乏明顯的賤斥情境（如同我們透過拉瑞米鎮民們的眼睛所看到的），也說明了即使是在當今的美國本土，在像如此強調差異與性別歧視的論述中，一種不安全感也依舊瀰漫著。換句話說，這一個「缺乏」的論述，與那明顯「在場」的論述相比，兩者所做的其實差不多。然而，本劇最後似乎並未兌現此計畫原有的承諾—也並未將戲劇裡該有的「對話」帶入高潮。不管是在鎮民的部分或是集體的部分，那種因爲探索基本衝突而產生的恐懼似乎是顯而易見的。

This paper examines Moisés Kaufman's The Laramie Project in terms of Julia Kristeva's "abjection," in an effort to determine how useful this particular theoretical framework is in helping to explain the connection between the actual killing (the underlying reasons for the killing) and the resulting project. It was determined that, while Kristeva's "abjection" did a good job of explaining the actual crime, it did not relate very well to The Laramie Project play per se, because of the form and shape the play took on. At the same time, an argument could be made that the lack of an obvious abjection or rejection within the play (as seen through the eyes of the Laramie townspeople) in itself said some important things about the insecurities to be found within a discourse on difference and sexual preference in the United States today. In other words, the absence of such a discourse may have said as much as the obvious presence may have done. However, in the final outcome, it appears that The Laramie Project did not fulfill all the promise that such a project held-and it did not bring the "conversation" to a head in the way such a drama should. A fear of exploring the basic conflicts seemed evident-both on the part of the townspeople and on the part of the collective.