Of course. It is the form of how that dislike is expressed which can, and I think should, be taken issue with if it falls short of some very well known, standard and basic rules of debate / discussion.
The Ten Commandments of Rational Debate
An all too common and highly reactive comment is the emotion based, "you don't like a composer whose music I love" sort of thing -- the dynamic being the person who takes another's dislike of their favored (beloved) composer as a personal dis of the legitimacy of their feelings and / or person, which I thought people had learned the silliness of by middle school. Really, that sort of reaction is as much of a waste of column space in a thread as,
"Oh, No! Don't hate on that song," which is exactly as immature as it sounds.
The other very bad type of reaction (even weirder to me, also seen on TC too often and elsewhere) is when there is a topic -- especially contemporary music is prone to this phenomenon -- where a reader somehow gets all ego bound and imagines one or both of these two things:
1.) The existence of the topic as presented is an automatic slam on the taste of the person who does not get or care for contemporary music
(i.e, the topic's subject)
and / or
2.) Somehow the very existence of that thread is a direct and militant order to the reader that they must listen to and like contemporary music.
(i.e, the topic's subject)
I do really have a hard time that anyone past middle school still reacts in such a way: it is clear they think any comment on anything not in accord with their opinion on the matter is personal and about them. It is surprising and discouraging they would still have that mode so up front in their thinking.
The missed takes in reading and the reactions, mistaking simple statements leading to situations like those mentioned above, are, sorry, pathetic..
You are not "discussing" anything if you say merely, "This music is rubbish," or call some repertoire "grating noise," etc. Sure, it is "an opinion," but an opinion of no worth at all.
I find those approaches or "dynamics" infantile and a more than seriously unattractive stamp of self-indulgent. That pathology -- or attitude, does not make for any thing which could be called discussion, while it is perfect for igniting "epic," childish flame wars.