This is stupid! Where's Kash?!?

Overwhelming agreement here.

Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 347 (10th ed.), spells it as two words, with no hyphen:

douche bag - n (ca. 1963) slang: an unattractive or offensive person

The following dictionaries also spell it as two words, without a hyphen: Webster's New World Collegiate Dictionary 429 (4th ed. 2001) ("an unpleasant, offensive, or contemptible person: a mildly vulgar term"); New Oxford American Dictionary 511 (2001) ("a loathsome or contemptible person"); Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary 589 (2d ed. 1998).

Doesn't that pretty much settle it?

And no, to anticipate the inevitable criticism, that definition does not embrace people who use dictionaries to find out how words are spelled.

Tell that to the AP, which seems to go with "douchebag."

I think spelling it as one word is more modern. I would not be surprised to see dictionaries adopt that spelling as well.

"Douche bag" is two words. End of story. Use your common sense. 74.8% of you out there are simply wrong....must not be lawyers.

A douche bag is a feminine hygiene product.

A douchebag is exemplified by 10:34 and 10:40.

Point - 10:43!

Roundhouse kick to the faces of 10:34 and 10:40

Fight!

HIGHLY inappropriate for GOOD FRIDAY. Christ is PISSED.

Chicago Manual acknowledges that phrasal nouns like douche bag usually start as two words, quickly move through hyphenation, and eventually settle into one compound word. CMS prefers to reach this result sooner rather than later, so I think "douchebag" should be convention.

I agree with 10:38. Those of us voting for "douchebag" simply understand the way that language evolves. Lots of slang starts off as two words in its original/ proper use. As it develops into slang with a meaning distinct from its original usage, it becomes one word. Examples: Asshole (began as ass hole), Butthead (when people actually still used the word), clusterfuck, etc. None of these words began as one word. Douche bag may be listed with a space in dictionaries, but dictionaries are always a step behind the times. Merely reactive. And relying on a dictionary that is seven years old seems like pretty shady practice. Douchebag is the spelling of the future, and the spelling of today.

Lat, you've got so much more talent than is reflected in posts like this. Seriously. Don't go down this path.

Ok, it's Friday. It's after 10AM (in some parts of the country). WHERE'S KASH?

11:02, is that the faint aroma of dbaggery I smell? Quit the dbagitude.

10:43 is correct. It's two words if one means it in the literal sense--i.e. a container for a specific hygiene product.

One word when it's referring to 60% of the lawyers out there.

Lat, a few thoughts on the site:
--No more posts on grammar and grammar-like subjects. Most attorneys don't care, and, in my view, wisely so. Makes me less likely return to site.
--Fewer polls. Most of the comments (including mine) are garbage. If I read them, I do for the few gems. Polls are just an aggregate of garbage thoughts, and I think very few care.
--More Kash.

douchebag

Dear Comment Poster,

Go make your own website.

Best Regards,

Everyone Else On This Site

I think "Comment Poster" is trying to help us define "douchebag" by providing an example.

you're all douchebags. yale is full of fruitcakes, nyu is a joke, columbia is in a ghetto, and penn will always be relegated to TTT status, no matter what the US News says. harvard is okay, but chicago has always had better supreme court law clerks and more respected professors.

One word is certainly correct for everyday usage. But in a legal opinion? That demands some decorum. Two words all the way.

I will say that I've enjoyed the comments on my comments. Probably because they didn't have anything to do with grammar.

Comment Poster:

If Lat wants your input, he'll ask for it . . . in a POLL!

If spelling is supposed to evolve over time, and if we apply the spelling trends of some of the chuckleheads on teh internets, perhaps it should be spelled "dpuchebag."

Or maybe "Douche. Bag."

.

Doesn't Bryan Garner have something to say about this?

How Dare you speak for me 10:55! I love these conversations

A search of all federal cases on Westlaw for the word "douchebag" yielded only two cases, both district court opinions:

Doninger v. Niehoff, 514 F.Supp.2d 199 (D.Conn.,2007.) [HS student unsuccessfully sought injunction after she was barred from running for class office after she referred to sholl administrators in her blog as “douchebags”]

Stewart v. Weis Markets, Inc., 890 F.Supp. 382 (M.D.Pa.,1995.) [evidence supervisor addressed comments to plaintiff with the epithets: “sleazebag,” “douchebag,” and “bitch” sufficient to state prima facie case of sexual harassment]

However, in 10 cases, the court used “douche bag” to spell the epithet, and in only one is the expression hyphenated.

In federal court at least “douche bag” wins hands down.

I used douchebag in an opinion once. My judge changed it to cuntbag. I think he's right.

It is definitely "pleaded" instead "pled".

Origin of the word choice can be traced back to the English language version of the Bible:

Lamentations 3:58:
O Lord, You have pleaded my soul's cause; You have redeemed my life.

Chicago 2L sounds like one of the people I hated in law school.

this poll is a douchebag. And it is one word...and 10:43 rules.

Funny how much kinder commentors were today regarding a quirky topic than they were in response to the quirky post about "substantive".