Yes, AIBU is really the best place for a nuanced answer to this question... ;)
I don't think that there is consensus among serious experts in international law that what is going on in Gaza right now is genocide. 99% of the people using the word today are using it in a non-formal way to describe the severity of what they see, and within the narrative that they use to interpret the events.
Many Palestinians interpret what is going now as part of an ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, beginning with the 1948 Nakba and continuing with Israeli oppression and violence ever since.
The limitation of this interpretation of current events is that it frames the Palestinians only as victims, and in doing so it overlooks the 7 Oct attacks and doesn't address the continuing threat of Hamas and other regional allies against Israel - and Hamas's absolute lack of support for a ceasefire (and intentional endangering of their own civilians by placing Hamas military structures literally under and among the civilian population, then recklessly committing atrocities which they knew would invite an extremely strong Israeli response).
Some Israelis interpret Hamas's intentions as genocidal. Hamas leaders have in recent days clearly stated that the goal of the attacks was to bring Israel's borders to a permanent state of war, that they intend to repeat the Oct 7 attacks again and again, and that they want to destroy the Jewish state, (and also that they are not responsible for Palestinian civilians).
More widely though, Israelis interpret what is going on now as a war of no choice, (a) because it is simply impossible to continue to live alongside Hamas given their current capabilities and intentions (see above, capabilities proven in the Oct 7 attacks); (b) because Hamas on their own probably can't destroy the state of Israel but anything less than a robust response makes Israel extremely vulnerable to a regional war by their allies including Hezbollah which could certainly endanger the Israeli state, and (c) because Hamas is holding 240 Israeli civilians in Gaza and all efforts must be made to rescue them.
The bigger question here rather than genocide is proportionality, which in terms of international law is judged not in proportion to the number of Israelis already attacked by Hamas, but in relation to the future danger Israel is trying to prevent. I think that the consensus is that it is difficult to defend the proportionality of some of Israel's actions over the last month, but that the future danger is not negligible, and Hamas also shares a large responsibility for the harm to Gazan civilians, by having absolutely no regard for their safety, and in many places actively endangering them (preventing Gazans in the north from moving south, embedding military infrastructures within and under civilian populations such that there is no way to engage with them without massive damage to the civilian population).