Clearly this woman spends far too much time obsessing over how to manipulate men. She shouldn't have been given additional exposure on Knoxviews.

Who didn't avail themselves of the education available to them and thereby took the path of least resistance.

There are at least 5 professors in various programs at UT that would have easily given this writer tools to blow up both the "prude" and "slut" sides of the argument. How? By attacking the common notion in either characterization whereby women are "commodities unto themselves."

Then again, maybe after she lands some "nice guy" who will "treat her right" and she finds herself staring out the kitchen window with a  pile of dishes under her chin and a long day at the office behind her, she will get it. Maybe how she will get it is by staring out that window at the guying cleaning the pool next door and saying to herself, "Hey, I'd hit it." 

True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler

Great writing can't be hidden... (I think the Daily Beacon article by Ms. Peavy is well-written, too.)  Check out what some of the young ladies on campus are wearing these days.  It almost makes one long for the dress code of the early 1970's.  I have seen girls wearing shorts that barely cover their behinds (bottom of butt exposed) and sporting 5" stiletto heels, walking to class.  Not to mention the low-cut tops that are the fashion now.  I really don't care what anybody wears, but that sort of thing does look kind of cheap to me, too.

I have a body of hands-on research proving beyond a doubt

You certainly have a way with the turn of a phrase!

As for how people show up for interviews, you'd be amazed. It's partly immaturity, but in some cases it's also poverty. I seem to recall some organization (here or Florida, don't remember, maybe both?) that counseled young women on dressing more professionally, and had a program where professionals donated business attire to help them get started. They should do the same thing for young men in need of a little help and/or common sense.

(Then there are the extreme idiot employers, too, such as some bizgrrl applied to that didn't allow slacks, makeup, or hair coloring.)

Word. Being a lawyer, I can attest to the neutering effect of law school, both on men and women. It can take years to undo the damage to one's sexuality that law school inflicts. Most lawyers never recover. All you have to do to know what I'm talking about is walk through the courthouse any morning for five minutes.

And if you really let the style of law infect your brain, you start thinking everybody else should be the same way. Everybody should appear (if not be, in essence) conservative. Everybody should be ambitious. Everybody should view herself or himself as chattel, and assign corresponding value.

Concurring (ahem) with Beanster here: acknowledging that dressing like a tramp will cause one to suffer in job interviews, social climbing, and attracting conservative men*** is like acknowledging that bathing is more effective when you're naked. But there's no time to enjoy showing off your supple young flesh when the time calls for it than when you're, well, young and supple. Take the advice of a 41-yr-old woman who knows when it's time to cover up: when you got it, flaunt it, baby.

(***I'm pretty sure that even most conservative men - eligible or otherwise - don't object too strenuously to decolletage falling to within less than four inches of a nipple. They might not hire them, but life has moments unrelated to job interviews where a little nip goes a long way. The only people who strongly object to it, in my experience, are women who resent it, for various reasons ranging from the implications to the dignity of our gender, to the attention it draws away from men they wish were looking at them.)