One of the folks watching the hearings this morning remarked that this was the first time he had ever seen a United States District Judge use the word ‘douchebag’ seven times in one morning. The questioning and testimony concerning the word bordered somewhere between amusing and absurd.

The lawyer for the defense asked this morning’s witnesses, two high school students involved in the case, if they thought it was in appropriate for a member of the student government to refer to a member of the administration as a douchebag. There was some back and forth between the lawyers and the judge about the relevance of the line of questioning, and judge suggested to the defense attorney that if he really thought it was beneficial to poll the student body as to whether or not it was appropriate, then by all means, he should proceed, and proceed he did.

The attorney for the plaintiff explored a different line of questioning the meaning of the word douchebag in various contexts. I believe he established that in some contexts it might be considered highly offensive, and in others it may actually be appropriate. There was not a discussion what sort of context a post on Livejournal should be considered. Is it more like official school or legal communication, or is it more like high school kids chatting amongst themselves in a mall?

That said, with all due respect, I would like to present a fictionalized, and hopefully humorous account of how I think the testimony should have gone. Some of the ideas have been gathered from others closely following the case:

Defense Attorney: Do you think it was appropriate for a member of a student government to refer to a person representing the school as a ‘douchebag’?

Student: I don’t know. I guess sometimes it does. I guess it depends on the setting.

Defense Attorney: The blog post in question is now a part of the court record. Do you believe that using such language in court is appropriate?

Student: Um, I’m not sure.

Defense Attorney: As an example, would you and your fellow students feel it is appropriate to refer to me as a ‘douchebag’ here in court?

Student: No sir. ‘Douchebag’ connotes a jerk. Instead, we would probably refer to you as ‘shit for brains’.

<laughter>

Defense Attorney: I have no further questions.

Plaintiff Attorney: You have said that to you ‘doucebag’ connotes a jerk. Am I correct in understanding that you do not believe that Miss Doninger was referring to members of the school administration as feminine hygiene products?

Student: That is correct, sir.

Plaintiff Attorney: Do you believe that Miss Doninger was justified in asserting that the members of school administration are jerks?

Student: Yes sir.

Plaintiff Attorney: Can you explain to the court why students might consider members of the school administration jerks?

Student: Perhaps a good starting point would be to ask members of the school administration why we are in a Federal Courthouse on a fine summer day discussing when it is appropriate or not to use the word ‘douchebag’.

Plaintiff Attorney: I have no further questions.