If I were still in college, this would have been a great addition to the reading list for Psych 80D - Human Sexuality (and in fact she does cite names I remember from Psychology and Sociology classes, like Irigaray, Jung, Freud, and Foucault). I think the title is perhaps purposely provocative, because it's really a study of the way teenagers in particular attempt to create an 'other,' a target that defines what not to be and places themselves on the side of what is right. Later chapters describe the experiences of gays, people of color, trench-coat wearers etc. and the xenophobia that encompasses class, race, and sexuality in a web that is difficult to unravel.
Perhaps the 'slut' was at the core of her original study, but it is hard to pin that down to one all-encompassing theory--another topic she explores (and the fact that studying something can change it, and the inherent biases of the observer, etc., etc.)
She wants to show that there is a solidarity, a common thread between all victims of slut rumors--that they are not alone--but also concedes that the reaction of each experience affects specific women differently. She talks about them in the sense of a more all-encompassing 'they' (rather than 'some of them') so there are several parts that seem contradictory and made my head swim (e.g., "THEY have a hard time getting past the experience and it stays with them for the rest of their lives and they have a death wish" AND "THEY escape their critics to the anonymity of a bigger city, do really really well for themselves, and wish that the naysayers could see them now). She mentioned that she was inundated with the sheer number of responses and the variety of experience, but kept repeating that their experiences were cliché.
I don't judge this too harshly, though; it's sort of the same as the dissonance between "look before you leap" and "strike while the iron is hot." They're both true at different times. Some of the narrative snippets are repeated again and again as they apply to different facets of her argument, though, which isn't as forgivable, but the way its so drawn out, it would be difficult to use just their names as a reminder. Also, some of the snippets are really brief, making and difficult to say whether each individual actually proves the whole.
She seems to want there to be a happy ending, but the women she interviews range from 40+ (who were more likely to have been affected by sexism) all the way down to present-day (2002 at the time) 13-year-olds. When will this insanity end?
Caveat Emptor: there are some really awful stories, beyond being whispered at in the hall. Just tragic, really, but those parts don't last long. Overall, an interesting topic, but it took way to long to read in relation to its contents.