If you are already having trouble keeping up with what sorts of offenses, or even mere “microaggressions,” are enough to “trigger” people to “cancel” you for your “whiteness” or other attitudes of “privilege,” well, Georgetown University has invented new sins you weren’t even aware of committing.

Georgetown Magazine, the school’s publication primarily for alumni, has gone so “woke” that caffeine and amphetamines are soporifics by comparison.

Rebecca Epstein of the Initiative on Gender Justice & Opportunity at Georgetown Law is now on a crusade against — get this new phrase! — “adultification bias.” After years of feminists blasting men for calling 16-year-olds “girls” instead of “women,” now the alleged problem is just the opposite: It’s “the phenomenon in which adults view Black girls as less innocent and more adult-like than their white peers.”

Oh, we can be assured this trend has been verified as a vast problem through rigorous, scientific assessments, right? Well, said Epstein, she “validated it by talking to women and girls about their life experiences.” It’s all part of the “gender justice framework,” dontcha know.

The adultification-bias story is part of an issue that reports on support for “ancestors of enslaved people” (confusing “ancestors” with descendants, perhaps), interviews a professor “who specializes in American Indian and Indigenous philosophy [and] feminist epistemology” along with “Non-Western Aesthetics,” features a cover story on “a more accessible, inclusive Georgetown” devoted to a “Disability Cultural Initiative,” and highlights a separate article on “Stirring the Collective Conscience” about a program that “lifts up the voices of women and Latine, Black, and emerging leaders who are often neglected” — with one of its programs, naturally, being (yet another) “panel on Racism in Our Streets and in Our Structures.”

And so interminably on (and on and on), with not a single “marginalized” group or mission ignored.

And we know it’s all Really Important because So Many Words Are Capitalized.

In the name of parity, the magazine is self-parody. In the name of diversity, it’s awfully monotonous. It all comes across like a high school sophomore’s hackneyed idea of a “social justice” term paper. We might say the authors need some adultification, but maybe we’re using the word wrongly in a way that merits a trigger warning.