In The Guardian, an article appeared with this title:
"Margaret Atwood faces feminist backlash on social media over #MeToo"
( It is at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/15/margaret-atwood-feminist-backlash-metoo?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+USA+-+Collections+2017&utm_term=260620&subid=21429986&CMP=GT_US_collection )
Upon reading, I find that Margaret Atwood (and others) are calling for due process. She (and others) signed an open letter about it. (See the article for a link to the open letter.)
But some people are objecting to what Margaret Atwood is saying. (See the article and the open letter, for details about what Margaret Atwood is saying.)
As for me, I am favor of due process. Imagine the alternative: An absence of due process. Could an absence of due process be a good thing? Shall we abandon the idea of due process? I think due process is important; if it is not happening, then we should endeavor to find a way to make it happen; or if it shall not happen, then there should be an explanation telling why it shall not happen.
I am also in favor of the legitimacy of requesting, and claiming the right to, due process. Imagine the alternative. What could an opponent say? Imagine it: "If due process occurs, that would be alright, but it would be wrong to request it, and it would be wrong to claim the right to due process." Does that make sense? I don't think so. It would make about as much sense as saying: "You have a right, but only if you do not exercise it." In my opinion, that would not be sensible. What do you think?