And this changes the need to lock down a specific definition why, precisely? This assumes far too much that should not be. Some specific points might require vague, this is entirely too vague, but I think at core it needs to say "intentionally . . . " so we are dealing with authorial intent rather than reader responses. Also necessary and words like "deliberately provokes" "racial slurs" etc. You can have something that describes categories wothout being this vague.
And how about, letting a court decide when an impasse occurs? Afterall if you say a person is X you have the epistemic responsibility to prove it, he or she does not have the duty to disprove it, he or she logically must only demonsteate you have not proven your case.