The people I know named Karen are nice people. They have nothing to do with a popular meme, not my invention, that describes a specific behaviour. Karen also refers to a specific ethnic group. Few know this, and this is not relevant to the discussion.
Of course, people are free to judge what they find offensive. In obvious cases where lots of people agree, it is worth formulating rules. When only a few people think so, it may be wrong to make them arbiters of what free speech is permitted. It is not that they are necessarily unreasonable or mistaken, though this may be the case. I shouldn’t gratuitously offend people unless trying to do so. However, not everything is equal just because someone objects.
As I said in the original linked thread (without response there from the poster here):
I’m not sure I agree with the reductionist “you are either woke or not” which might be used in theory to justify conflating important issues with something far less so. (Our college newspaper insisted on using the spelling womyn, for example). There are many important issues, and some things are obviously offensive but others far more subjective, and might offend far fewer people. I think many people have implicit biases, I think there is value in trying to do the right thing. Using the term Karen is, to my view, a fairly innocuous thing if there is a male version and it is understood not to refer to actual people with that name but a specific behaviour. Reasonable people might disagree.
Patton Oswald has a comedy bit about how he tries to be woke and sensitive, but perceived [“mistakes” (in the eyes of someone) will occur]. He talks about how RuPaul was criticized for not using the most up-to-date terminology. He jokes about how he will be booed in the future by saying something he thinks is innocent and doesn’t realize is now offensive to some of his future audience. “I don’t think people should have sex with their clones. BOOOO!!!” He sees this as inevitable.
So when I was in college, a few newspaper editors, woker-than-thou, decided it was not sufficient to use “spokeswoman” or “spokesperson”. It was better (and one editor felt it was the only acceptable option) to use “spokeswomyn” because they held word “woman” should not contain the word “man”. Would most people agree? No, they wouldn’t, and this includes most women at that time in that place, some of whom were turned off by this type of nitpicking and said so. Of course, you can use whatever term you prefer. But you don’t necessarily get to act as sole arbiter and judge for many people, just for one person. That said, no offence was intended and I apologize if you took it in a way that was unintended.