Eh, I can actually kinda get behind a fair amount of what Dunsparce said. There really is such a thing as witty, clever, and even, occasionally, even
constructive humor that can and sometimes even should be made at somebody else's expense. There
is such a thing as gross overreaction and self-victimization.
There is also such a thing as "boundaries," and yes,
@Dunsparce, those often should just be respected because somebody really wants to have them so, most particularly if they're not even such broadly expansive and unreasonably-drawn boundaries that it's seriously constraining for the average person to just stay outside of them.
I'm obviously not going to say that you should even go so far as denying objective facts, like "it's gay to be more attracted to a woman with a penis than without, all other things equal, if you're a dude," just for other people's comfort. Here's me, not doing that very thing right now. (Though in all fairness, I wouldn't generally bother even mentioning that one if it didn't keep coming up outside of my actions; it's not something I'd care enough about to bring up myself.)
If you wanna make an argument that denouncing outright falsities and misconceptions is more important than emotional considerations of the deluded, then I can back you up on that, because I don't think it's actually
good for the affected people in the long run (let alone society as a whole) to foster contentedness with falsehoods. But, understand: that really isn't something that comes up often. Most divisive issues are not matters of objective fact; and of those few that are, you're rarely (if ever) going to be in possession of all pertinent facts. (Me an' my pair of Science Degrees can do it for just a couple of the popular ones.)
And if you shoot off recklessly offending people without even having full knowledge of what you're talking about, you're not actually being righteous or productive in any positive way. You're being a nasty little bastard who just thinks his comfort and feelings of self-fulfillment come before those of the people who don't agree with him.
So yeah, in lieu of any of us having absolute working knowledge of all (or most) things, we draw lines and respect boundaries. We're social creatures, even the most antisocial among us, so it doesn't come all that unnaturally. I personally will tend to have an easier and more enjoyable time in the company of people who don't have very many trigger zones, and just have a couple of them myself, but that doesn't mean I won't respect a friend's right to have some boundaries I don't really have or see a need for myself.
If it ever
really gets hard to stick to them, then we can have a talk about trying to rework them so he/she's less sensitive and I'm less restricted, or I can reevaluate the worth of hanging out with somebody I have to struggle to even hold conversation with... but really, it's pretty rare for such an extreme case to actually happen in reality. It's entirely possible to stick to reasonable limits for general company, without necessarily embracing every complaint any sensitive person has ever had on the internet, and instead of just ignoring the very concept of civility altogether.