Not to bash the ideas of a friend of mine, but I love hearing arguments about what is and isn’t steampunk, because they remind me of “the death of goth”. I think fondly upon the days when people started coming to CityClub first in PVC and rivets, then dressed as Marilyn Manson, and finally raver attire. DOOM! GOTH IS NOT GOTH!
Please don’t be mistaken – I am a total jackass about the proper definition of terms; half of my sense of humor is probably making fun of other people for being vague or imprecise with their terminology. Even so, it’s pretty much a huge, delightful game to me, and I do not seriously expect people to walk around using the same definitions. That’s why I am often defining my word usage, I suppose.
Anyway, being unhappy about people using “steampunk” without actually having either “steam” or “punk” is, to me, like protesting that someone uses “goodbye” in a sense that’s different from “God be with ye”. It meant one thing, and has since grown organically through popular usage, and now means something altogether larger.
I do agree that the best steampunk fictions are not-entirely-comfortable works that poke a sharp stick into colonization, technological supremacy, White Man’s Burden, and the idea that advances come without pain, loss, or pollution. But if Starship Troopers (the movie) can exist in the same genre as Starship Troopers (the book), I think steampunk can stretch to encompass both alternative technology (gear and zeppelin) -and- lighter fare.

You are WRONG!
Starship Troopers (the movie) does not exist in the same genre as Starship Troopers (the book).
What? Something else? Yeah, I suppose that other stuff is probably true.
Heh, Well, what about Starship Troopers 2: The Troopening?
I was thinking more like Starship Troopers 2: Electric Starship Boogaloo.
Starship Troopers (the movie) does not exist in the same genre as Starship Troopers (the book).
Absolutely true! There weren’t *any* bewbies in the book!
YOU’RE PLAYING MAKE-BELIEVE WRONG!
Why you always gotta be wrong, huh?
;)