The riddle of free speech where decent people want everybody to enjoy it, accept the risk of being offended and offending others, versus those who want to silence others and change law away from free speech.
The post-modernist fashion show, safe spaces, trigger warnings, white male privilege, compelled speech, class warfare. I don't think the neo-marx lefties will get very far though.
The bigger dangers are mass surveillance and censorship by governments and large corporations, the erosion of democracy in general and the many countries and cultures in the world that privilege their religious institutions into safe spaces where wrong-speech is a crime; free speech for the religious me but not for the otherly you. Notably Islam scores very bad here.
Ranking countries by their blasphemy laws
Part of free speech is that you can call other people and/or their ideas inferior and horse lavender. For reason a/b/c/ or no reason at all. You can offend intentionally because it is fun or to provoke, or offend accidentally without meaning to offend. And accept that you might also be at the receiving end. That is the core game of the free west and the bedrock of a functioning democracy.
A religious zealot who believes that non-/otherly believers are inferior evil-doas who cannot escape punishment of the Great Guy in the Sky is as much entitled to that belief as a non-believer who believes those zealots are morons and victims of a superstitious delusional cult. All beliefs, criticisms are allowed to be expressed in the public space. But this already is eroding away because decent people don't believe in an eye for an eye anymore. They don't want to
fight for free speech when their own govts and law fail to protect them. In the UK this is happening as we speak.