Yeah, people on this sub have never heard of New Weird, it seems. You can call it SF if you want, just like you can call it F if you want. It's really both.

New Weird is a genre-blend of different speculative literature traditions. Like Vandermeer, or Mieville, or Harrison, or Swanwick.

I know the side rules specifically say not to get into arguments about what constitutes what, but since this is directly asking that question I feel it's relevant to state that there is no tangible difference between SF and F other than their tropes, and hasn't been for a very, very long time. At least a century. You can't claim any of the SF plots from Asimov on down are based on good science - they weren't even when they were written. The closer you inspect any idea in any SF book, the more you understand the great liberties taken with regard real, established science. They merely follow a list of established tropes from earlier, more wide-eyed periods where the limitations of science weren't widely known or respected. They're a hell of a lot of fun, but that's all they are. One has elves, one has spaceships, but spaceships are not any more a prediction of our future than elves are of our past.

In that respect I feel New Weird authors demonstrate a great maturity. They understand it's about the literary aspects, not the predictions that don't hold up under scrutiny or the strict categorization of subcultures. Character and commentary, that's their jam, and they have fun at the same time.