A letter writer caught Stars and Stripes violating its own policy. Staff Sgt. Amanda K. Castro, from Ramstein Air Base, Germany, wanted to know why the paper identified an alleged victim of sexual assault in a recent story. Stripes and many other papers refrain from such identifications, to avoid any stigma that may attach to the victim.

In most cases, the person not so identified is a woman. In this case, it was a man, who alleged that a colleague was harassing him. There was another twist: The accusing person previously had been charged with sexual assault himself in a case that was ultimately dismissed.

Stripes' top editors told me that these two circumstances -- the alleged victim's gender and his history -- did not justify the use of his name. Simply stated, they acknowledged, identifying the man was a mistake.

As a postscript, there has been a movement afoot for a while to name sexual assault victims and alleged victims. The forces behind it, to a large extent, are champions of women's rights. The reasoning goes that women are somehow treated as second-class citizens if the cloak of anonymity is given to them, or, as the proponents of the new policy would put it, forced upon them.

Most media organizations are sticking to the non-identifying rule, which I -- and letter writer Castro -- think is the right course.