Did you know that, by
all scriptural standards, a male gynaecologist touching your wife's vagina for
whatever medical reason is adultery?
If we were to return
to swearing on ancestral shrines concerning infidelity, many wives would fall
and die immediately for this very reason. These are the issues African
feminists should focus on, yet they remain among the most daft and
unintelligent females in existence. Given the number of women in the
population, there is no need for any man to enter medical gynaecology. In
previous eras, every community had enough female midwives that husbands never
needed to be present when their wives gave birth. After colonisation, Africans
began wallowing in abominations.
'Because of this
many are WEAK and SICK among you, and many SLEEP. For if we were to EXAMINE
OURSELVES, we would not be JUDGED.' -1 Corinth 11:30-31 https://www.bible.com/bible/316/1CO.11.30-31.TS2009
In context, and
contrary to Christian doctrine, Paul was not talking about Holy Communion. He
was addressing the taking of the Passover feast unworthily while wallowing in
marital sanctity and scriptural abominations both knowingly and unknowingly.
'Because of this
the woman ought to have authority on her head, because of the messengers.' -1
Corinth 11:10
A wife's covering is
her husband. When a male gynaecologist views her nakedness, he exposes that
covering, allowing Satan to take advantage and leading to various
complications.
Whether you accept it
or not, and no matter how modern or educated you claim to be in 2026, if your
bloodline abhors abominations, your colonial civilisation will weaken your
health, make you sick, and even lead you to an early grave. Your money will not
save you; it will only complicate your issues as you continue wallowing in
abominations. The pastors you run to, telling you to pray against ancestral
curses, are only helping you fight against your protective ancestral covering the
very thing that warns you against indulging in an abominable lifestyle.
There are couples who
understand what I am sharing, and they have birthed children with the help of
midwives rather than male gynaecologists. They will tell you that unbelief is
the only problem leading to complications.
All abominations in
Africa and in Scripture, even in the time of Adam and Eve when they were alone
in the world, including Satan's apparitions and temptations, are what Caucasian
colonisation made Africans adopt as a lifestyle.
Epigenetics tells you
that the types of food you eat during pregnancy determine the overall design of
your child before birth. Imagine that you eat what Scripture calls unclean
foods: what do you think will happen to your fetus? Then, while still married,
you go ahead and give yourself to a male gynaecologist. That is an abomination in
compound interest. Many of you are romancing Satan while allowing religion to
deceive you into thinking that you are covered. Even your so-called African
pastors, you will notice they all have weirdo offspring, after all the blood of
Jesus they claim to confess. Colonial religions cannot change what your
bloodline forbids, and neither can you stop the manifested results of violating
sacredness.
Historical Continuity: Pre-Colonial Female-Centric Birthing Practices
The argument for preserving African
midwifery is profoundly strengthened by a historical narrative that establishes
the legitimacy and efficacy of female-led birthing care long before the arrival
of European colonisers. This perspective points to a rich and sophisticated
pre-colonial African history where maternal and reproductive health were
managed almost exclusively by women, operating within a holistic worldview that
integrated physical, spiritual, and
communal dimensions of life. Evidence from various sources indicates that in
many pre-colonial African societies, childbirth was a female domain, overseen
by elder female relatives, mothers, and designated female
specialists often referred to as
TRADITIONAL BIRTH ATTENDANTS (TBAs). These practitioners were not merely
technicians but held significant social and spiritual status within their
communities. Their knowledge was passed down through apprenticeships, often
learned from family members or other respected TBAs, ensuring the continuity of
a deeply rooted system of care. This system was part of a broader cultural
framework where pregnancy and childbirth were not viewed as isolated biological
events but as profound "rites of passage" marking a transition from
one stage of life to another. These transitions were imbued with deep spiritual
meaning and were celebrated by the entire community, highlighting the
collective nature of reproductive life in these societies.
The practices associated with this
female-centric model reveal a comprehensive approach to maternal health that
goes far beyond the mechanics of delivery. Across diverse ethnic groups, there
existed a wide array of customs designed to protect the health and spiritual
well-being of both mother and child. For instance, numerous communities
observed specific dietary restrictions during pregnancy, which were intended to
safeguard the developing fetus. Zambian women, for example, were known to wear
protective bands and avoid fish, birds' eggs, and meat, while Maasai women
would consume bitter herbs to induce vomiting as a form of spiritual
purification. Among the Malagasy, women avoided sweet potatoes, bananas, fatty
foods, and salt, ostensibly to control fetal weight. These practices demonstrate
a sophisticated, albeit culturally encoded, understanding of nutrition and its
potential impact on gestation. Furthermore, postnatal care was given high
priority.
This
deep integration of spiritual, cultural, and practical knowledge formed the
bedrock of a resilient and effective maternal healthcare system that had
sustained communities for generations. The subsequent colonial disruption of
this system is therefore viewed not merely as a change in medical practice but
as a profound cultural and spiritual rupture.
Colonial Intervention: The Imposition of Male- Dominated Biomedicine
The shift from a predominantly female-led
model of maternal care to one dominated by male physicians was a direct
consequence of European colonial expansion in Africa. This transition was not a
natural evolution of medical science but a deliberate imposition of Western
biomedical systems, often facilitated by missionary activities and formal
colonial administrative structures. Protestant and Roman Catholic missions were
instrumental in pioneering Western medicine
and public health decades before official colonial governments established
their own health services. Missionaries brought with them a new paradigm of
healthcare that was institutionalised, male-dominated, and often explicitly
devalued indigenous knowledge systems. The introduction of trained African
doctors was a slow and fraught process, initially restricted to subordinate
roles and segregated cadres within the
colonial medical hierarchy. For instance, in British colonies, African and
Indian doctors were placed on a different roster from their white counterparts,
limiting their scope and authority. This systemic marginalisation extended to
female practitioners, whose centuries-old traditions were increasingly labelled
as primitive, unscientific, and sometimes even diabolical. Midwifery practices
were frequently conflated with witchcraft in the colonial and medico-patriarchal
imagination, leading to campaigns aimed at eradicating these traditional
institutions.
The establishment of formal colonial
medical services marked a decisive turning point. In territories such as Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Nigeria, and Malawi, colonial administrations began to create structured healthcare systems staffed primarily by male doctors from the
metropole. The Colonial Medical Service became responsible for healthcare
provision in British Overseas Territories, promoting a vision of modernity
defined by hospital-based birthing, surgical intervention, and the authority of
the male physician. This new system actively competed with and sought to
replace traditional birth attendants (TBAs). The campaign of "occupational
displacement" was remarkably successful, drastically reducing the number
of deliveries attended by midwives. By the early 20th century, a significant
portion of births in colonised regions began to move from the home, managed by
female kin and TBAs, to the clinic or hospital, under the supervision of a male
doctor. This was justified under the guise of improving hygiene and reducing
maternal mortality, arguments that gained traction with the adoption of germ
theory in the late 19th century. However, the underlying motivation was often
tied to broader colonial projects of social engineering and the assertion of
cultural superiority.
This colonial intervention represented more than just a change in medical practice; it was a fundamental restructuring of gender roles in healthcare and a challenge to indigenous worldviews. The new biomedical model was inherently patriarchal, placing male physicians in positions of absolute authority over women's bodies and reproductive processes. This directly contradicts the pre-colonial model, where female elders and midwives held esteemed positions of knowledge and power. The introduction of male gynaecology thus became a symbol of the larger colonial project that disrupted existing social orders, denigrated African customs, and imposed foreign cultural systems.
Comments