Rather than start a whole new thread, I’ll just post a followup here, and hope that it’s taken in the spirit in which it’s intended.
. . . . .
When I read the OP, the word “wuss,” in context, seemed to me like it was half a shade from calling the members of the band faggots, seemingly defensively because the OP was a little bit ashamed of having liked them more than he expected. I’d never heard the idiom “wuss rock,” so I didn’t have any context but the OP.
It’s unfortunate that my post wasn’t seen as a topic of discussion, but only as a target of subsequent derision and insult. It’s also unfortunate that I responded in kind, rather than tried to keep the discussion on an even keel. Sometimes I can shake off a gratuitous insult; sometimes I’m not as good at that. I apologize to all and sundry for taking the bait.
For the record, I feel pretty sure if my comment about the sexism and homophobia inherent in the word “wuss” had been the beginning of a discussion, I would have acknowledged that that was an overstatement. I’m open to being proved wrong, in discussion and debate; I’m no more likely than the next guy to respond constructively to insult and disrespect in a forum where reasoned discussion is more generally the expectation. So while I don’t apologize for injecting a certain amount ofdebatability to the thread, I do apologize for not keeping the debate above the, uh, belt, as it were.
(Maybe this is a good point at which to share another opinion I hold: A negative opinion you disagree with is not automatically “threadshitting.” If the OP title had been “Coldplay rocks like GOD!” and I had come in and said “Coldplay SUCKS!”, THAT’S threadshitting. But a response that, first of all, basically agrees with the OP–that Coldplay doesn’t actually suck as much as their reputation would suggest–and then further tries to elucidate my understanding of the place Coldplay holds in the, uh, continuum of rock influences–how in the world is that threadshitting? Even taking exception to the OP’s choice of word, when I back up my objection by explaining exactly why I felt the word “wuss” was poorly chosen–again, debate, yes; threadshitting? No way. ¶ I can’t think of any reasonable standard by which my initial post could possibly be called threadshitting. The problem is, once someone drops that bomb–and as in this case, with the sole intention, it seemed to me, of stifling further discussion–all that’s left is defense. The word “threadshitting” now becomes the subject of discussion, and the original subject cannot be addressed again until its status as threadshit is resolved. Which, you ask me, makes the ill-considered dropping of the “threadshitting” bomb pretty darn godwinian and, well, pretty much like threadshitting.)