I can't imagine judges would normally except this especially since it seems to be a known way to skirt law.

Sigh. Reductionist thinking again. Yes, of course, if you literally say “small penis” the plaintiff would rightfully cite this history.

But it’s not meant to be taken literally, like those are magic words. You say “he failed upwards, funded by family wealth and connections, despite everyone thinking he was an idiot who could barely string a sentence together”

The point is to emphasize, even exaggerate, low-status negative qualities.