In recent decades, reggaeton and trap, musical styles of the urban genre, have been criticized for the vulgar and provocative lyrics of their songs. This leads many people to think that songs of this type are "garbage" rather than artistic expressions. Their arguments are often based on notions that art should be either something ethical, non-profit, unpopular, harmless, complex, or useful. The musical genres in question are accused of "having none of these characteristics." However, these opinions are not based on official definitions of art and are justified mostly by prejudice and assumptions. The concept of art goes beyond ethics and complexity. In fact, the opinions that these people commonly offer are not even rigorous interpretations, but rather cognitively biased comments.

I. Art

There’s no an agreed definition, but between official definitions we can organize Art to be a wide range of human activities that involve creative imagination and aim to express technical proficiency, beauty, emotional power, or conceptual ideas. Does this apply to reggaeton?

Reggaeton and trap are human activities. Like any musical genre, their songs possess technical proficiency and a rich origin: their musical style and lyrics are influenced by hip-hop, reggae, and rap; on various occasions also by African rhythms and, lately, by melodies of the 80s. Any song of this genre follows the same creative and technical process as any artistic production. The composer has an idea, develops it, executes it, and to do so, makes decisions based on lyrical and musical knowledge. A reggaeton and trap song regularly uses literary figures such as metaphors and similes - that are mostly sexual. It has a ton of hyperboles, personifications, and many ironies. Within their lyrics, one can also find symbolism of all kinds, and a great deal of innuendo. Several songs even display syllogisms; for example: A lyrical "I" gives logical or ironic reasons that support the thesis that this protagonist is a better romantic option than someone else. And to these figures, we can add ambivalence, anticipation, secularization, hamartia, allusions, and the list goes on. Many songs have narrative strategies to, for example, make us empathize with characters, or immerse us in a story (we will delve into this later). I have not heard a single reggaeton song that does not contain alliteration, assonance, rhythm, meter, cadences, rhymes, epiphoras, litotes, or anaphoras. The rhythm of reggaeton comes from the Jamaican dembow and has a simple beat. In the case of trap, the rhythm is calmer and slower with lower revolutions. It is very simple and “poor” on its complexity, but it does not make it less of an art.

There are comments that declare things like “that Bad Bunny or Ozuna,-” known performers of these genres,"-are not intelligent enough to think about such technical efficiency; that if these characteristics or any intentional use of literature are found in their songs, it's by chance." In literature, if these elements are visible in the work, it is because they were reflected upon and done intentionally; even when the decision process was unconscious. Musical geniuses or people with musical training, or with a natural ability to manipulate people’s emotions, handle these musical tools intrinsically. Coincidences happen, but to believe that the regularity of technique in reggaeton and trap is a coincidence is illogical. It is also true that a person does not have to be intelligent or intellectual to be an artist. An ignorant person can know how to paint, sculpt, and express themselves through physical creation. It is a matter of artistic skill, not intellectuality. Intellectuality is very welcome and common in art; it creates great experiences. However, it is not essential. And if the rhythms are not as complex as those of other artists, it is because art has no limits. The fact that they are not as elaborately crafted as classical music does not make them “garbage.” It is actually the simplicity of this rhythm that makes it catchier and more concise.

Now, let's write about emotional power. The two genres in question evoke emotional reactions in the audience thanks not only to the technique but also to the content of the lyrics. The lyrics of trap are very vulgar; they talk a lot about sex, drugs, and they touch on themes like egocentrism, infidelity, and other controversies. Reggaeton becomes slightly more romantic. In general, the theme of both centers, generally, on unbridled sexual freedom (there are also songs that talk about other topics like work, life, family, heartbreak, and other softer themes). A listener of any musical genre is a human being subject to hormones that control their emotions. Sexual themes in music awaken many levels of testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, and oxytocin that sexually "turn on" a human being. Just as visual artists use colors to manipulate the audience's emotions or writers like Kafka used vowels that evoked depressive sounds to trigger melancholy, reggaeton uses words, phrases, sound effects, and even sentences that awaken sexual desire and the urge to have intimately special connections.

And not only that. Many people have lived typical moments from a trap song: flirting, innuendos, the perreo dance, parties, revelry, polyamory, betrayals, etc. I, a lover of this musical style, tend to listen to songs that bring back memories of the past. Listening to a song can bring back sensations you once felt.

Also, reggaeton often immerses us in fictional stories. Most songs feature fictional characters in situations of partying, libido, lack of control, and mayhem. A song puts us in the characters' shoes and takes us on a journey through their stories. "Callaita" by Bad Bunny talks about the duality of the human being, being both well-behaved and wild at the same time; it tells the story of a girl who is super responsible with her life, but at the same time, is a professional at being shameless and discreet. These stories don't have to represent you, but one understands the emotions of these characters, and sometimes, one feels what they are feeling without necessarily having lived it. An example of this sympathetic pull is the song "Ojalá" by Bryant Myers. This song is about a boy wishing all kinds of harm upon a girl, and reasonably, everything he says is very violent; they are things I would not wish on anyone. However, the song is about hatred, a screamed-out hatred that represents the emotional damage of the lyrical "I" because a girl betrayed him. Somehow, one feels that strong resentment without sharing it. These stories also make you forget the world for a moment. And that is the same reason I go to the movies: to have an escape from reality.

And something important about reggaeton and trap is how it's danced: It is a sexual and shameless dance that ignites sensations in the body. Very simple and intimate at the same time. When done properly, and with the right partner, it has no match.

Many, due to the irrational hatred they have for the genre, fail to empathize; hatred inhibits the enjoyment of something and fosters prejudice. (“Irrational” does not mean silly or stupid; "irrational" means that it is based on the emotion of the moment and not on universal reasoning). Something called the "anchoring effect" is very present here, which I will discuss in another paragraph.

The third characteristic is "Beauty." This term can artistically refer to two concepts: 1. The English translation for "bellas artes" (beauty arts) is "fine arts." It refers to the type of art that makes excellent use of technique and vast intellectual content. This is a branch of art, but it does not encompass all the world of art. The other semantically similar concept of "Beauty," which the Oxford definition refers to, declares it as a pleasant perception, and I would interpret it as a sensation of perfection. A reggaeton song can be so well composed or reach so deep into someone's feelings that it generates a sensation of perfection and auditory pleasure, even if it is vulgar or dirty. Beautiful is not synonymous with pretty or lovely. The lyrics and music generate a feeling of continuity, fluidity, meaning, and structure, even if it is grotesque. The same can happen in paintings like Goya's "Saturn Devouring His Son" or Bosch's "The Garden of Earthly Delights." One notes how ugly that reality is, but the perfection is felt. That sensation of perfection is more present in people who have learned to resonate with the work, that is, those for whom it holds greater emotional power.

Finishing with the characteristics of Art, reggaeton does deal with conceptual ideas. And we have already mentioned them: infidelity, lust, betrayal, and a ton more concepts that are thematized.

La Real Academia Española (RAE) says that art "is generally understood as any activity or product created with an aesthetic and also a communicative purpose, through which ideas, emotions and, in general, a vision of the world are expressed, through various resources, such as plastic, linguistic, sound, bodily and mixed." We have already dealt with these same concepts in the previous paragraphs. Aesthetics studies the perception and essence of beauty in art, and a trap and reggaeton song is always communicating either a feeling, thought, or narrative.

What is my concept of art?

The essential things that art must have are creativity and justification. Literature is the creation of texts, a word that comes from "textile" (from the Latin "textum" which means "woven fabric"). Just as a piece of clothing is entirely made of interwoven threads that connect each part to make the whole, texts are held together throughout their entirety. Every word, phrase, scene, and sound is connected to whole of the piece; they mutually support each other semiotically. The author creates something that can be read and heard. Lyrics handle what is called "Poetics." This word comes from the Greek "poiein" which means "to make" and "poiesis" which means "artificially made" or "not from nature." In German, “artistic” and
”artifitial” mean the same: “Künstlich.” A lyric, like any work of art, is an artificial creation. Another way to define what I want to state with creativity is that an artist is someone who brings an idea they had in their mind into reality. Reggaeton is creative because it is produced from imagination to reality. It just so vague and basic, for people to talk down on its artistic veracity.

By "justification," I mean that the aesthetic value of the work exists as long as every stroke, word, shot, lighting scheme, column, and prop has a function beyond the fiction. Why does the character have a red jacket, instead of another garment or the same one in another color? Why does that sculpture have that pose or that expression and not another? Why does Kafka use the word "Schuld" (guilt) to refer to the debt (whose German translation is "Schulden") that Gregor Samsa's family owes his boss? The Why of each of the artist's decisions is the justification. What is it that the artist wants to tell me without saying it? As an artist myself, the Why is a burning in my head desire to say something. Everything is premeditated and implicit. It doesn't have to be something so profound; as long as every detail contributes to the work, it is valid. The most curious thing is that no work achieves this 100%; art is an attempt at perfection. We are human beings and we do not handle imaginary themes perfectly because of how subjective they are, and when we bring them to reality, we make an approximation of what we had in mind. Reggaeton songs are no exception.

To judge poetry as "bad" or "good," there is no objective criterion. The understanding of art is not done with criticism, but with literary analysis (which in Germany is called "poetologische Interpretation," a concept that translates to "Poetic Interpretation," although that title fails to evoke the same meaning as "Poetologisch"). Many people criticize reggaeton in a personal and not a poetic way.

Art depends a lot on the author's intention, which is why poetic interpretations go hand in hand with what the author wanted to say when creating the work and not with what the spectator thinks they are saying; that would be a personal interpretation, and that is not the artist's fault. Here we are talking about the difference between denotation and connotation. What is sought is what the author significantly denotes (although sometimes, artists intentionally use connotations for certain purposes). To interpret poetically, one must learn to read a work and analyze what the work itself is trying to express. A poetic interpretation must be made with evidence that is present in the work. The evidence with which they criticize reggaeton is generally not valid.

II. Interpretation

One of the first criticisms of reggaeton is that it makes young people dumb. In fact, there have been studies that show that reggaeton fans, in general, have lower IQs than listeners of other genres. And it's possibly true. The studies do not indicate that reggaeton is the cause of it, or that it has an influence. Those same studies indicate that those who listen to Beyoncé or rap are less intelligent than fans of Led Zeppelin, who are less intelligent than those who listened to Beethoven. Trap, reggaeton, and rap are more present in working-class neighborhoods that normally lack education. Many reggaeton fans will never stop to question themselves introspectively because they, probably, never received an academic upbringing that developed logical, open, and critical thinking. The lack of education might be the real reason for the lack of intellectuality in those areas. This could be just me bluffing, but it evidences that there’s a wide spectrum of perspective, to just say that reggaeton is the cause of this "dumbing down.” It is a correlation, and that has been changing. This study was conducted in 2014; today, with reggaeton being more accepted in all social groups, there have been new studies that indicate greater brain activity in motor areas of the brain when listening to reggaeton compared to other genres.

Other common criticisms are that "reggaeton induces young people to be violent towards women," "Reggaeton denigrates women," or "Trap is misogynistic." Macho stereotypes are found in its lyrics, but no indication of violence, mostly. At first glance, the lyrics are sexist, denigrating, and prejudiced, but interpreting them as violent exposes judgments that are not found in most of the lyrics. Nevertheless, that does not take away its aesthetic value.

Today, the effects of rape and gender-based violence are known. They range from low self-esteem, depression, feelings of fear, tissue damage, loss of sphincter control, and suicide. It is serious that abuse due to the phenotypic and genotypic difference between two biological groups exists. And that exists regardless of the lyrics of a normal reggaeton song. Reggaeton expresses people's sexual freedom, but I don't know of any reggaeton song that expresses abuse against women. This is why I say it is logical to say that these songs incite sex, but not rape or the idea that a woman is less than a man. It is not like video games, where it has been proven that if you take them away, violence among young people decreases. That does not mean they should not be allowed.

Many people call for censoring different types of art because they supposedly induce various negative things. Many, both young and adults, think they are Toretto and drive at more than 200 km/h on the Autopista Norte in Bogotá. In the United States, the rates of speeding tickets slightly increase with the premiere of Vin Diesel movies in some areas. There are boys and girls having gangster delusions because of narco-series or Martin Scorsese films. So is it wrong to make those movies? People wanted to censor the movie "Joker" because this masterpiece would induce violence, and indeed it happened: a young man in Tokyo dressed as the Joker injured 17 people with stabbings and acid. Many trap songs talk about fights, wars, and murders. A work of art, whatever its genre, when it talks about violence, indirectly induces it. When it talks about suicide, it indirectly induces suicide. If they talk about sex and drugs, the same. And these themes can be seen in the works of Ñengo Flow, Quentin Tarantino, Evanescence, Martin Scorsese, Jefferson Airplane, The Weeknd, and Guns N' Roses. But "indirectly" is the adverb I use because the purpose of these works has nothing to do with the reaction of certain individuals who let themselves be manipulated by fictional things. The solution for this type of problem is a broad, inclusive, and effective literary education, in which people learn to understand all aspects and levels of fiction; something that does not happen in many language classes across the world.

Art does not cause society's problems; often, it only mirrors them. Censoring art would be the same as rejecting reality on many occasions. It is urgent to attack the root of society's problems, but attacking art is useless.

Tokischa, a very controversial Dominican singer and model, responded to one of the criticisms of her song "Desacato Escolar" (which talks about prostitution) with the following:

"I think the people who criticize it don't want to accept reality as it is. Dembow and urban music in general is the expression of the barrio and the underworld; of what is lived. If rap tells you about crime and weapons, it is because that exists, not because the artist is inventing it. We cannot ignore those realities. With prostitution it's the same, it has always existed, and if they talk about it in songs, it is because it is so. If the person who criticizes feels very pure, then maybe it's because they don't want to know about those realities or for all that to come to light, but we sing about what we live, and that is inevitable."

"Perra" (Bitch), a song on which this artist collaborated with J Balvin, was bombarded with criticism that labeled it sexist and misogynistic. So much so that Balvin, who had the least to do with the song, removed it from YouTube.

My question is: why is the expression "I'm a bitch in heat (horny)" denigrating? It is a sexual metaphor. Like all metaphors, it has a tertium comparationis (a third concept that connects the concept used in the metaphor with the concept this metaphor refers to in reality). A Perra en Calor is a female individual of the canine genus that is in estrus and wants to have sexual relations. The metaphor would be saying that the lyrical "I" wants to get fucked hard. Is wanting sex with great urgency something denigrating? Is there something wrong with a woman wanting to have those desires? It would be wrong to think that all women feel that way, because not all of them feel that way or want to be labeled in that manner. But there are many people (men and women) who do like to feel this way, starting with the intellectual author who explained the following:

"I am a woman and I have always expressed myself like this... I have met women who are more private with their sexuality, more serious, who have approached me in the course of my life, and have told me: 'I would like to be a bitch like you.' Deep down, a woman wants to feel like a bitch, sensual. Every woman is different and feels like a bitch in a different way."

That song was an artistic representation of the sexual emotion of the author and many people. Deep down, in my unconscious, even if I deny it, I want, sometime, to be a Perra. That song is the way she sees reality, her reality, and her way of living sexuality. Art also speaks of the author's vision of reality. She feels that way, that's how she likes to live her sexuality, and who is going to tell her that's wrong, and that she shouldn't feel that way or that it's denigrating?

The whole song is a metaphor about dogs. A lyrical "I," J Balvin, shows himself to be a horny dog who wants to fuck a bitch. Tell me, readers, does that never happen? Has there never been someone who was horny for sex in their life or who has been extremely turned on by another person? Is this unreal? Is this bad? Here, in the song, no one is being hit, or taken without consent. Here we see the daring and vulgar interaction of two figures mutually consenting to the acts and agreeing with the central point of the song.

The word "Perra" (Bitch) has a very broad semantic range: Besides meaning a person (in Colombian youth slang, males are also called "perra") who sleeps with many people, a "perra" can also be understood as "an empowered woman." Previously, a bitch in this definition was synonymous with a woman without integrity. But today we understand that this is unreal; there is nothing wrong with being a bitch. The derogatory words of Caribbean slang are no longer used only to insult: Words like "Marica," "huevón," or "perra" are no longer to indicate marginal people. "La Perra" can pragmatically mean "The Boss Lady," "The Fucking Best," or "The Badass." Based on this, I want to show what Tokischa stated on another occasion:

"A woman is a real bitch because she brings bread home, because she educates her children well, because she is a woman who honors herself by working. This is different, it's simply the interpretation I'm giving. I am an artist and I express what I feel, what I fantasize about. There will always be positive, negative criticism. I express what already exists."

Another criticism that abounded from the public was about the video. It is said that "it is racist to have an Afro-descendant woman tied to a leash." The concept of the video originated in a neighborhood composed of a majority of Afro-descendants. Everyone conspired to make the video that way, and they saw it as normal. The Afro-Dominican singer explained:

"The video is very conceptual. If you, as a creator, make a song that talks about dogs, then you are going to create that world."

If the story of the song talks about a bitch who wants a dog to dominate her, then the video is clearly representing that. Is there something wrong with those situations? Is it wrong for a woman to want to feel used? Is it wrong if she enjoys it and is fascinated by it? Is it wrong to enjoy that when it is with consent, safety, and health? The "Perra" of the song represents someone who wants to live her life her way without hurting anyone. The leash can be an allusion to the fetishes that she has, and having sexual fetishes is something completely normal.

A final criticism was that the author defends her song solely for commercial benefit. If the author wanted commercial benefits, she would issue a public apology as J Balvin did; these criticisms cost artists money and legal troubles. That song was not played anywhere because of the prejudice, and no one played it because they associated it with public scorn. The most commercial thing to do is to apologize; but the author prefers to defend her art, even if that defense is not popular. J Balvin, on the other hand, has proven to be an extremely commercial and image-conscious person, therefore, he offered a public apology for an art that is not even his. And people applauded him for it. It's not wrong to want to have a good image that sells; however, the artist preferred the defense of her work over public image, and that costs someone a lot of emotional strength.

Calling J Balvin "sexist" for this video was also a judgment made lightly. The author is seen only as the intellectual authority of the work; its creator but not its defender. What a fictional work says is not the same as how the author thinks. If a work is fascist, it means that the author wanted to construct a fascist work, not necessarily that the author is a fascist. This detail is one of the differences between literary texts, like stories or fables, and factual texts like essays or manifestos. In factual texts, like "Mein Kampf" or "Das Kapital," what appears is literally what the author thinks. We cannot poetically judge a literary author by the work they produce. Was D.W. Griffith a racist? These questions cannot be answered based on a work he made. Griffith was a racist, not for making "The Birth of a Nation," the most racist work I have ever seen in my life, but for the factual comments he made about African Americans. J Balvin made a song, he did not give a statement about how he thinks. Therefore, he cannot be judged as "sexist" based solely on a song.

I have found arguments about the "ethical responsibility" of artists which consists of anticipating how the public will take the message. First, the artist does not have an ethical responsibility to anyone. Second, if other people twist the message or misinterpret the work, it is a separate imaginary problem. A professional critic interprets the work as it wants to be read, and analyzes its technical, emotional, and complex depth. When seeing an image, a critic must see what the image wants to say, and that first takes rigor and a lot of time.

Why then do people make light and erroneous interpretations? Generally, three factors come together to make prejudices: a closed mind, tastes, and irrational thoughts. Let's talk about irrational thoughts: The anchoring effect, defined as a cognitive bias that defines a person's behavioral tendency in a specific situation, makes us make quick decisions based on similar experiences. The brain of many animals, including us, is conditioned to save energy, and the act of thinking is an exercise of immense caloric expenditure. For this reason, it is easier to see something and judge it immediately than to do a deep analysis. It is something predetermined, evolutionary, and unconscious. Our brain is made to survive the African savannah tens of thousands of years ago, and back then, with predators and environmental dangers, we had to be quick in judgement by anchoring ourselves to prejudices. If someone's way of reflecting is already conditioned in a certain way and with certain predetermined judgments, it is most likely that the judgments they make will be closed-minded and in seconds. If someone had an alcoholic father in their childhood who was abusive and violent, that person will probably make irrational decisions when faced with a situation where alcohol is present. If a population has been led to believe for decades that recreational drugs are significantly more harmful than drinking alcohol or eating sugar, it will judge irrationally when confronting rational arguments that support the recreational use of them. Today, the world is different than pre-historic times, where we can afford the luxury of analyzing situations better and obtaining better results. This effect can explain why many people fail to understand how much reggaeton encompasses, and how unproblematic it is. Inculcated beliefs such as religious values, honor, or integrity strengthen these judgments.

A person with a closed mind does not ask introspective questions, so they are less likely to realize that they have a pre-established cognitive bias, reinforced by an imaginary idea. Reggaeton and trap talk about all the sins in all religions, and go against most religious values, such as heterosexuality, virginity, integrity, intimacy, among others. These concepts have evolved secularly in society to such an extent that even many people who are not religious dismiss them just the same, in their behavior and judgment. As soon as a person who abhors reggaeton comes into contact with a song, it will cause them immediate discomfort. Many people who have a strong emotional affinity against racism or misogyny will see an Afro-descendant woman tied to a white man in a video, and without looking at the big picture, ignoring the context and not knowing the subtext, their brain sends them the judgment in milliseconds: "Sexist and misogynistic. Balvin’s fault" whereas the whole idea was Tokischa’s. No one stopped to see what lies beyond, and what the true reason for the being of that song is.

It should be clarified that many intellectual and literary elites are also filled with people who close their minds and clash with new types of art because they got used to accepting only what has been normal and aesthetic for them. That happened with baroque, impressionism, and the Renaissance. These people who label these genres as anti-ethical or anti-artistic do not assimilate what is lived on the streets today. They lack those experiences because of the conditions and the times in which life placed them. In contrast, those who do have those experiences of vulgar flirtation and dirty (and healthy) sexuality, understand how fun, exciting, and peaceful a rude song can be. This second group of people obviously would not perform a high literary analysis, and they just enjoy without thinking or knowing why. They are also affected by the anchoring effect but in the opposite way to the first group. The second group lives the world exposed in these songs (the new reality), and those experiences anchor their minds to pleasant and unproblematic situations for both women and men. These people would have the more coherent irrational thought because they are the ones who have been living what reggaeton and trap express, while those in the first group criticize something they know exists but do not assimilate or not understand and do ignore.

True knowledge lies in being honest with oneself, and in recognizing the shortcomings of one's thinking. Aiming to be more skeptical, critical, and open is what the world needs to be less problematic. In other words, going against human nature through education would improve society in artistic, and social aspects as well. Thanks to civilization, judgments can be made more effectively, and one can condition the brain to unlearn its original configuration and insert a more introspective and rational one, which allows for a more open and understandable approach. When one follows the path of knowledge, one can understand that offenses cease to exist, that opinions are unnecessary, and that hatred can be optional. Furthermore, this type of reflective education provides the ability to find beauty in the most disturbing and grotesque things; to find love where one thought one would not see it. And if I can say one thing, it is that one misses out on the best experiences in the world, including love, by not reconfiguring the way one's mind is inclined.

III. Other Concepts

Another criticism contains statements like "something commercial cannot have aesthetic, technical, or literary value." Filmmakers like Christopher Nolan and James Cameron make movies with high emotional power, high aesthetic quality, and high economic income. And the aesthetic value of their creations is not reduced. Another example is Marvel movies, which are 100% commercial and still comply with many rules in storytelling, and even revolutionize them. Marvel evokes many emotions with its well-constructed characters, with whom we empathize immediately, we want them to achieve their goals and we understand what it implies if they don't. Marvel, until Phase 3, pays meticulous attention to the details of its films, making them very realistic. Is it not art just because they seek money? Even advertising, as defined by Jeff Goodby and Rich Silverstein, “is putting art at the service of capitalism.”

Many internet critics contrast reggaeton with modern poetry or songs from the last century, and come to the conclusion that reggaeton songs are not art because of the poor preparation they have in comparison with the German poet Goethe or the British singer-songwriter Freddie Mercury. Well, it's true: many reggaeton songs take little time to produce and leave a wide room for improv’. But that does not take away their artistic quality. When reading "Faust, Part One," one has the sensation of perfection, and it is because Goethe spent almost 30 years writing it. However, that does not mean that "One Hundred Years of Solitude" by Gabriel García Márquez is not art because it was made in much less time. One does not feel that sensation of perfection reading about Colonel Buendía as one does about Doctor Faustus, but both works provide us with a lot of emotion and a lot of fun. One also cannot declare that the Beatles wrote garbage just because Beethoven's symphonies were more complex and required more brainpower in their composition. Complexity is not directly proportional to art.

Additionally, these pseudo-critics have no notion of what it is to produce music and how complex it is to create hits today within the Urban genre. There is a joke that says "anyone with a three-key piano can play reggaeton." To compose, you need musical knowledge; and success already depends on talent and creativity — what in the genre we would call "flow." Not just anyone can manage to produce something of quality. To produce something like that requires one of two things: either a lot of artistic knowledge and training or intrinsic genius.

IV. Conclusion

We should not patronize or censor a song or a genre for the simple fact of the beliefs or tastes of those who hate it. Not all types of art will be to our liking, and that is a fact. And something that is also a fact is that the human brain is so flexible that it can be conditioned to like things it never thought it would like. But just because one does not yet like a type of music for whatever reason, does not mean that the artist is doing a bad job. "De gustibus non est disputandum," as the Romans said: "In matters of taste, there can be no disputes."

Reggaeton can be enjoyed, with its rude and vulgar language, without it making us violent. A wise meme I once saw said: "Sex can be disrespectful, but not without permission." Reggaeton and Trap speak of an insolent sex, but one that is fun for both parties; they do not speak of a sex in which someone is physically or psychologically harmed. And if any song does talk about that, the aesthetic value would not be affected by the content.

There is no problem in reality that can be solved or improved by removing reggaeton. But if reggaeton is removed, an activity that many of us like is lost. To be offended is an irrational act. With constant cognitive training focused on hermeneutics, a person can learn not to be offended. I hated reggaeton when I was a child; for me, it was something "immoral" and "ignorant." I used to argue that "reggaeton burns neurons." But later I realized that those judgments never had logic, nor evidence. Correct learning comes from accepting the world as it is.

The authors of reggaeton and trap express themselves using filler words, situations, and various slang that represent the Caribbean youth, a youth without shame, without offenses, eager to take on the world and to show that reality is very different from how millennia of history tried to sell it to us.