01:00 AM EST on Wednesday, November 9, 2005

Both the Beenie Man show at Lupo's Heartbreak Hotel and the protest that it spurred went off without a hitch Monday night.

About 25 people marched under the banner of Voices Against Hate, a newly created group, in a circle across the street from the club, silently, with signs bearing such slogans as "Lupo's gets cash while we get bashed," while Bob Marley played from a portable stereo.

The protest broke up as scheduled at about 9. Inside, Beenie Man, one of two dancehall reggae performers coming to Lupo's this month who have inspired protests, went on, along with members of his crew, a little after 10.

Voices Against Hate is organizing a boycott of Lupo's because the club booked Beenie Man for Monday night and Buju Banton for Nov. 21. They say that these artists "advocate hate-based violence," based on the lyrics of several of their songs, which call for the burning and shooting of lesbians, "batty boys" and "chi chi men" (the two latter terms being derogatory slang for gay men in Jamaican patois).

It was hard to make out the lyrics through the thick Jamaican accent and the loud sound system, but I didn't hear any of the homophobic lyrics that led to the call for a boycott of the club. I also didn't see any problems inside the club during the show, or outside the club after the show, which ended shortly after midnight. The club says that about 350 people were there, which looked about right to me.

I observed the initial organizational meeting of Voices Against Hate. I also went to their news conference last Thursday and spoke to several of them on the phone in the past week and a half.

These are good people. And they're working against hate-based violence, particularly violence against homosexuals, which is something that happens more often around here than most of us know and probably would like to think.

And they're right when they say that it's not a First Amendment issue -- that Lupo's is a private entity and club owner Rich Lupo can book or not book whomever he wants. He's not legally required to book Beenie Man, Buju Banton or anyone else.

They're also right when they say that this isn't just a gay-rights issue. As the group's Karen Izzo said at Thursday's news conference, it's not like people carry a Sexuality ID card that thugs can look at before deciding whether to attack them. You don't have to be gay to be gay-bashed, and I can attest to this personally.

(Here comes the word you've probably seen coming for at least three paragraphs now) But.

I can't join Voices Against Hate's call for a boycott of Lupo's. I see what's behind Rich Lupo's attitude in this, and if I were in his shoes I'd do the same thing.

The first problem is Voices Against Hate's major demand: They not only called for Lupo to cancel the shows, but for people to stay away from Lupo's until Lupo makes a commitment "not to book artists who advocate hate-based violence."

Well, I don't want to listen to such an artist, and I'd venture not many people would. The problem with this categorization is, who decides? And how?

Let's take Buju Banton for an example. In the listening, interviews and online research I did for an article I wrote last Friday, neither I nor anyone else has been able to cite a homophobic Buju Banton song of more recent vintage than 1992's "Boom Bye Bye."

It's true that Banton is currently charged with the home invasion and the beating last year in Jamaica of several men thought to be gay. But he has no prior criminal record of such behavior and hasn't yet been tried on these charges, much less convicted. What if he's acquitted? What, then, is the basis for calling him an artist advocating hate-based violence?

Ultimately, it would come down to Voices Against Hate's opinion. And that would come down to a 13-year-old song, which Banton recorded at age 19.

Again, I was at Voices Against Hate's first meeting. They were not hunched around a table, rubbing their hands together and cackling with glee, saying, "We'll make Lupo run every potential booking by us first! We'll take over the autonomy of running the club!"

They absolutely weren't intending that. But if their demands were met, that would be the net result. I wouldn't stand for that if I ran a nightclub.

Not that Beenie Man did himself many favors Monday night.

No, he didn't call for executing, burning or killing anyone. And between songs he did say "Accept life for what it is. Respect every living thing."

He also said "If you're a gay guy, keep it to yourself and you'll be all right. . . . Do your thing; I'm not going to fight you."

Well, thanks a lot, Beenie. But number one, homosexuals shouldn't have to keep it to themselves; Beenie Man quite explicitly doesn't keep his heterosexuality to himself, either on record or on stage Monday night. Number two, homosexuals in his native Jamaica get harassed, arrested (yes, homosexuality is illegal) and killed, even if they do keep their sexuality to themselves.

So, not terribly enlightened. But does that constitute advocating hate-based violence? And should Lupo wait until Voices of Hate decides?

No, it's not a matter of the First Amendment. But it is a matter of autonomy.