You also can’t generally criticize the police or military or social order beyond the standard “everybody knows” talking points.
Honest discussions of how society should deal with and treat people who are afflicted with pedophilia is another. There are entire swaths of viewpoints which are basically not allowed to be expressed, including most/all of the compassionate ones.
Criminal justice reform and the prison-industrial complex.
Atheism.
Suicide, and people’s rights thereto.
Drug usage, and people’s rights thereto.
The occasional need and right of a populace to employ violent revolution to secure human rights.
The illegitimacy of state violence.
Artistic nudity (I’m a portrait photographer).
Non-artistic nudity (porn is great).
Artistic non-mainstream porn (weird BDSM stuff is great).
Individual responsibility of people doing immoral jobs. People get absolutely outraged at true reporting of facts (“John Doe, whilst at $EMPLOYER, implemented unethical feature $X”).
Criticism of group identity, or discussion of the legitimacy of identity politics in general.
Jokes or memes about any of the previous, or sexual violence, or tragic deaths.
Increasingly, anti-war viewpoints. The global west is heavily invested in any enemies of Russia or China being unswervingly supported. Being anti-war is more and more a fringe position that is subject to censorship.
Criticizing the major publishing platforms, on those platforms themselves. You won’t be able to run an Amazon workers union site on AWS, for example. Nor can you discuss CCP censorship on TikTok.
Lots of things are off limits in most parts of the internet. People who think the only people complaining about the restrictions on speech online are nazis or pedos are... fairly unimaginative.
In terms of having actual discussion, sneak laid out a good range of topics that quickly get derailed in flame wars (IME). I'll personally add homelessness and mental health as a few more very touchy topics.
I know high quality, nuanced discussion isn't a 1st amendment right, but that's what the other half of the conversation wants while most argue with the strawman half that wants to be racist/sexist online.