To quote one of my favorite characters in all of fiction, 'Let's take that piece at a time.'

When you consider how your enjoyment of good events may be causing bad events for other people, such that the "net enjoyment" you put into the world is negative, can it really be said that you are living an ethical life?

First assumption, we have a way to measure the net 'goodness' or 'badness' of a person's total experience on planet earth so far. I'm not sure that we can. Partially because lives are generally very intricate, but also because 'goodness' and 'badness' are generally relative to something, and a lot of actions can be good and bad, with no clear net balance.

Second assumption, after assuming you have a way to measure that 'net good/bad' up to the present, is that your projection into the future will be reasonably accurate, or at least accurate enough to predict if a significant number of cases will change status from 'net postive' to 'net negative' and vice versa.

Third assumption, after assuming you are able to confidently project if someone will have a net 'goodness' or 'badness' to them, is that you have a clear, consistent and universal definition of 'ethical life.' I've been told pretty often, in life and Hubski that such questions usually are answered in terms of ones roles within a social/cultural context. Am I a good brother? Sister? Spouse? Teacher? Student? Manager?

I'm not sure your example is a good one, and that's coming from a guy who likes extremes and extreme examples as justification for things. But, I don't believe that making rape jokes encourages people to rape.

To paraphrase

"Social responsibility" means... ...to understand how our actions affect other people and have higher-order consequences which shape our culture, and then using that understanding to inform your morality.

I agree with you on this bit, which is really the core of this particular matter. The issue though is predicting those higher order consequences and being sure enough of your grasp of the situation and it's context to know that any harm you cause is less net harm than if you left everything as it was.

I'm starting with an assumption. The assumption being that you want to help your fellow man to some degree. If you didn't want to do that you wouldn't want to potentially off yourself to decrease the burden you feel that you are placing on them. I may also be projecting a bit because I can identify with that impulse a lot. A lot of people have sunk a significant amount of time, effort, and money to keep me alive and well. If I offed myself now a lot of peoples effort will be wasted.

If you'd like to continue this in private feel free to PM me. Like I said I could be completely off base and be projecting pretty much everything.