You said: "For the woman, can she like Sarah did Abraham, just leave her life to be with her man even though she simply doesn't have a clue what is going on?"

We can understand some of this taking place in the past, especially among 'cultures' where the woman was considered the property of males, to be traded off as they please. But in traditional African cultures there was a major difference. When one group married into another group, they may have had slight variations in many things, but they shared a common value system. However, those were not perfect relationships especially when the male figure became the dominant one in families. There is a bigger reasoning for this, but I would keep it simple for now.

I doubt any serious informed female would want to leave her home to go with a male she knows nothing about, and simply trust in some Judeo-Christian teaching that says the male is the Christ figure and she should obey him. I feel today many females only tolerate this because of poverty.

You said: “Can the Rastaman trust that his woman is with him, and not party to the machinations of external interests.”

I would say, could females really afford to trust males, given the history of males assuming ‘Christ-like’ leadership over societies, and really making a mess of things. The world has been poorer because of male domination, irrespective of the so-called religious teachings that promote it. It was not always this way.

I wish that other people from Zimbabwe, and not just those who are Rastafarians, will join the board and share their views on many of these issues.