Emily Lindin is a Harvard graduate, a documentary director, a PhD candidate, a Teen Vogue columnist, a suicide prevention specialist, and the author of Unslut – a middle school memoir in which she tells her story through her own diary entries of being labeled a slut at age 11.

On Tuesday, Ms. Lindin tweeted this:

Here's an unpopular opinion: I'm actually not at all concerned about innocent men losing their jobs over false sexual assault/harassment allegations.

— Emily Lindin (@EmilyLindin) November 21, 2017

As she sort of already knew, this was quite an unpopular opinion. So after a couple of hours of being schooled on why this is opinion was so bad, she then tweeted this:

I guess this is why people announce threads. I am definitely interested in nuancing around this point (re: how it works on campuses, race, other factors) – Thanks to those of you who are doing that. https://t.co/jlO1cV0wvM

— Emily Lindin (@EmilyLindin) November 21, 2017

She was then schooled on how “nuancing” was not a word, and even if it was, she needed to admit that she was backtracking. She admitted that she had “missed a few layers” but denied that she was moving off of her position. Click through to the thread to see more.

This is just sad: A young woman can be so educated and yet have such an entitlement mentality that she can still be so unaware of how attitudes like this do nothing to correct real problems. She’s advocating a position exactly opposite of what our legal social contract promises – due process. Without attention to the rights of an accused, all order falls apart. It does not matter if the accused is guilty or innocent, that is to be determined at a later time through a fairly applied process. Without due process guarantees nobody is safe. Do you hear that Emily? Yes, even your protections under the law are subject to the whim of whoever is in power. Shouldn’t the fact that Donald Trump is president alert you to the dangers of doing away with these protections – your party is not guaranteed to forever be in power?!

There’s a reason it’s an unpopular opinion: It’s neither intelligent nor moral. https://t.co/ZohDrMyZt7

— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahNRO) November 21, 2017

It is important that we listen to every allegation, but simply making an allegation does not require that we believe it without scrutiny. Other factors will come into play as to whether each allegation is credible, and while we would not formally be concerned with burdens of proof since we are not in a court of law, the same concerns still apply. People still face consequences in the public realm even if there are no legal consequences. We should be equally as concerned with those consequences no matter the forum of discussion.

Here's your nuance: It's called due process. Look it up, for the sake of equality. https://t.co/ftUIxENcee

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) November 21, 2017

Bringing down public square consequences on innocent men should be a concern for women who are desperate to punish men. Are they seeking to group all men under one black cloud of suspicion, or do they conceive of a world where good men do exist? Without acknowledging that all men are not predators, and the hard truth that we must live in a world that includes men, these feminists will forever be unfulfilled in their crusade. They have not provided a way they can win this argument. It is a perpetual blame-fest, and likely one where they fully understand that it gives them grievances in perpetuity.

Even more sad than this one lost soul, is that attitudes like this are common among third wave feminists. They have surpassed a message of equality and instead carry a message of thinly veiled power and superiority. This is the same problem with most protest movements, and ultimately why they are rejected. No one is going to listen to a position that attacks their own integrity. These feminists advocate for a win-lose position – and they are not shy about letting that be known. The only thing I can say in their favor is that at least they are no longer hiding their true motives.