A prime example is the story in today's Hill newspaper, wherein unnamed female lobbyists are complaining that some Republican congressmen won't socialize with them or meet with them alone behind closed doors.
First of all, note that the partisan affiliation of the unnamed female lobbyists is never mentioned, an unfortunate omission given that some of them indisputably have close ties to prominent Democrats (prime example here). Without that context, it's unclear whether this is anything more than a drive-by partisan smear designed to help Democrats, who are struggling to win wome's support.
Second, to the extent that this is truly a problem for both Democrat and Republican female lobbyists, thank the Democrats and their MSM allies. Remember the discredited NY Times story about John McCain and the female lobbyist (denied by both sides)? Or the rumor about the alleged upcoming NY Times expose about John Boehner (also denied by both sides)? In light of those debacles -- and the unfair smears of all involved -- who can blame GOP congressmen for an excess of caution?
At the time the McCain piece ran, I wrote a Townhall column arguing:
Looking at the lack of evidence in the Times piece reporting unspecified (and unsubstantiated) “concerns” about an affair, who can blame senior male employees from concluding that such rumors can be the price of associating – even professionally – with an attractive, younger woman?
If the Hill's report about female lobbyists is true -- and not just the product of election-year dramatics -- it's curious that these female lobbyists didn't speak up sooner to defend one of their own when other women lobbyists were inaccurately smeared, or to denounce the newspapers and/or left-wing rumormongers who have jeopardized their livelihood by inaccurate, partisan reporting.