One way out of this mess is for society to collectively make a few small adjustments in their interactions to better align themselves with modern sensibilities
These ideas can be applied to a broad range of interactions, but to take a comedy act, by way of example:
A comedian produces their work in a 2-stage process. In the first stage, they develop their act without accounting for whether or not the material that they produce will offend anyone, thus maximizing creative output. In the second stage, the comedian submits the raw material from the first stage to a Diversity, Inclusion and Equity (DIE) committee which problematizes the material, makes edits accordingly and produces the final product, thus maximizing sensitivity to a diverse audience.
Due to variations in delivery and the general complexity of language, a sanitized act may still evoke inappropriate laughter. Therefore, each member of the audience must employ a real-time filter that they engage as they receive each joke during a performance. If a joke doesn't pass the filter, any natural laughter response is suppressed. The filter asks probing questions to decide if the joke is really funny. Was the joke fact-checked? Did the comedian cite sources? Could the joke be harmful to marginalized communities? Would laughing promote white supremacy? What would an ally do (WWAD)? This "absorb, filter, react" process is not very different from the now commonplace practice of inserting the correct, but perhaps nonintuitive, gender pronoun into speech as it's being generated.