What you are saying is correct. It might not offend many, and it surely doesn't offend me, but the #1 rule of PR is that if you have the slightest thought that there's a hidden meaning of your statement, or if someone could conceivably take your statement the wrong way, it will be taken the wrong way, perhaps by thousands.

Example: "Come in for a spa and get a free steak rib at a local restaurant" sounds 100% innocent, but there is a small fraction of a percent chance that someone might think "But what about an offer for me, since I don't eat meat?!" In public relations, probability values get converted to a number of real humans, so PR staff has to be aware of this probability of everything they post (which is always nonzero). That of course doesn't mean it shouldn't be posted, but they shouldn't be surprised when they get 20 negative comments if 100,000 people see their statement. It's a tradeoff considering the gain of making a statement.

Twitter's post easily breaks this rule without much subtlety.

That's an easy position to take if you are not one of the 53 people in question.

Totally agree, it's a tweet, it's not profane, it's supposed to be a joke. People need to lighten up.

The assertion that the tweet implies “you’ve been damaged mentally by someone in your past” is clearly accurate. No one seems to be denying that.

If this, coming from someone who doesn’t know you, does not sound offensive, what does?