The (direct) harm principle of free speech has been a standard recognized since at least J S Mill. It’s reflected in legal limitations on incitement of imminent lawless action (falsely shouting fire); incitement of violence; defamation; discriminatory acts that objectively deprive peaceful access to rights, opportunities, or resources we are entitled to. It does not restrict merely offensive conduct that bothers.

Are you referring to harassment in the looser sense of merely irritating conduct or in the stricter sense of personally targeted conduct that is unwelcome & objectively harms or deprives peaceful access as mentioned before (often through persistence)? We don’t have a right not to be offended.

Freedom of speech is specifically for speech we dislike including much that you listed. It’s also for speech to oppose that, which could be taken much further instead of trying to compromise it.