If a joke is humorous, then it should be a joke. I found no humor in the virginity jokes directed at him. Perhaps your experiences with such humor has been of a jovial, camaraderie atmosphere. Mine have not. In my experience, the people I have witnessed being the butt of such jokes have not been joked with in a casual, friendly manner. There has been, all to frequently, malice on the other end. Since it's almost impossible to ascertain the true motives of posters who are totally anonymous to me, I'll assume the worst until someone demonstrates otherwise.
It's one thing to be critical of the suit. There's nothing with offering observations about what one thinks might have been done better. The point is this: it's one thing to make comments about the suit. It's another thing to make it personal. There's zero reason for it. As far as I'm concerned, those who'd offer up such comments are the ones with feelings of insecurity or inadequacy.
Believe what you like.
Then, as you have concluded yourself, the problem is in how oneself interpret if a joke is a joke or not. If you can't interpret it as a joke, that's fine by me. But, you can't attack other people who thinks that it is a joke. We do it as a joke, as a camaraderie feelings, but if you think the other way, it's up to you. Don't blame the users and the moderators as insensitive if you think differently.
Several people are raising the point about this being the internet, it's all anonymous and people have to grow a thick skin in response to statements that they can only guess as to whether the intent was to joke or to be purposely malicious.
There's a flip side to that coin. You also need to be prepared for people to read your statements a certain way and maybe read the intent as to the opposite of your true intention. So in addition to growing thick skin as to the intent of statements, people also need to grow some thick skin in response to how others respond to their statements. If you really don't care how someone interprets your intent one way or the other, than don't complain when it happens. If you do care, even a little, then consider what you write. I'm not advocating that you censor yourself to the point of crippling what it is you want to convey, but there's no reason to devolve to personal insults.
That's all I have left to say on the issue.
Once again, the value of what is personal and what is not is depending on each individual. For one person, an insult to his intelligence is not personal, for another it may be personal. For other person, an insult to his hobby is not personal, for another it is personal. The world is not perfect. You won't know other person's value. You can't do a thing that will please all people.
In the Internet, all of us believe in free speech. You may talk shit about the government, about corporations, about everything. Yes, we still need to know other's person feelings, but we usually did it according to our "standard" or the widely received standard. For example, insult to one's mother is widely known as a personal insult, so I won't go for that, although maybe some of us are not concerned with insult to our mother. I also won't go to religion or race insult. Some of us don't give a shit to religion, but I still won't go that way.
In conclusion, I do jokes (or insults, depending on the person) according to my own values, and the widely received values. Why? Because I never known your values. That's why communicating requires thick skin.
Another example. In the Western, it's OK to call your parents with their name. It's not acceptable in the Eastern. Then, should I call the Westerners impolite? No, because that's they culture. Should the Western calls the Easterners overly-devotional to their parents? No, because that's how the Easterners do it. In conclusion, each of us has different values. You may expect me to adhere to all of your values, but I can't.