Curtsey from our bloggerini… Janine and Kate, Stephanie and Dawn… they started this thing and, they have inveigled upon Kristi to join them this week.

(“..but if you wear those clothes, people won’t be able to tell how attractive you really are… just give the other kids a chance, they are all just shy… remember, they are more afraid of you than you are of them… try not to be so odd, your cousins and grand parents came from so far away and even though you don’t want to do this, do it for me, if not yourself… “)

I blog because...

(“...that is the question, clark you know the answer… no, no one is staring at you, you know that you really enjoy this, why can’t you for once just not feel like it’s all about you?… they all just want to be friends...)

I blog because...

( Hey!!  you know they’re right … Hey Kristi!!  nice rack!!!  yo!   lol  yeah… that is is funny, isn’t it?  then there’s the one about the guy on the island with the three….  don’t listen to him, you are all so right in what you are doing here… yes, I do seem to attract a certain amount of attention… no, I don’t mind, they all mean well  and I rarely have to make them behave.   WOOO HOOO,  I got yer Post  right here….  no,  I don’t think thats highly inappropriate… I think that’s ighly funny  screww you… lol  (only if that Kristi chick wants me to quiet down...)

I blog because...

no idea. so there. you’re on your won. why, I don’t believe I know the answer to that and further more, you have had your chance all these years… go and get all empowered and fulfilled on your own. You seem to think you don’t need me. Well. If that’s the way you want it.

…god, when is the next Post due to be published?  lol  (yes, they did ask for it)

The Wakefield Doctrine provides those with the aptitude for and the interest in understanding the behavior of the people in their lives, a perspective that is unique, very useful and quite often amusing. Part inspired observation, part creative inference, this view of human personality, while not rigidly empirical (more flexibly anecdotal), can afford the dedicated people watcher, an insight that will be both refreshing and amusing. There is a catch.

We have found, in the course of writing some 783 Posts over the last 4 years, that even allowing for a certain element of rhetorical density in our efforts to explain the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, not everyone who reads this blog gets it. I know, how the hell can that be? Actually that was predicted by the Doctrine itself, that in order to clear the hurdles of the somewhat prosaic-ositousness of some Posts¹ the Readers would have to be clarks or (being scotts or rogers), have a strong secondary clarklike aspect.

But here you are, shaking your head as you read this, thinking ‘do I really have this much free time?!’

1)  like this one from December 2009:

‘…sun don’t shine, the gods look down in anger’

Click here to view the embedded video.

(Well, oh kay… interesting note to start a Post on… but stranger things have happened in and about the Wakefield Doctrine)

(…”this just in”…’clark…the seventies…were…thirty…plus…years ago’…stop…’please, stop’…)

Hey Reader! Yeah you!
Do you believe that your (personal) history defines and (pre)determines your future or what? Is there such a thing as the momentum of habit. (The ‘momentum of habit’  is the notion that what we are is simply a more elaborate form of what we have always been.) (Cheery thought, no?)

Well? Do you think it does?
Do me a favor, given that you know something about us here at the Doctrine…

Look back on your life. Try and recollect the things you have done, the places you have lived, the people you have known, since as far back as you can recall…
Now, erase the names of the people, delete the addresses of the locations and take off the labels of the things you have done (job title, education, religious designations). You can still remember your life, can’t you?
Even with names and labels removed/deleted/eliminated, you know that you have been alive, with a life that is yours and yours alone. You know, even without the names, you lived in one place (or many different places), you knew some people (or a lot of people) and you spent your waking time doing this (or doing that).
Your ‘life story’ runs from the first (and often sketchy) times you remember as a child through and right up to now.

Pretty goddamn ‘straight’ line isn’t it?
(Come on roger, stop protesting. You know what I mean. You are capable of this.)
Look at your life in terms of how many different interests and activities and ways of investing your time is evidenced. How different was your life when you were 7 years old compared to when you were 17 years old (…or 27 or 77…)?
(Yeah, yeah scott, I get the ‘I gots the girlfriends/boyfriends thing’ Does not matter. Lose the names, and they (still) are people you shared yourself and your time with, no different than a best friend in second grade or a spouse in middle age or the person in the bed next to yours in the nursing home.)
What I am trying to get across here is that the important thing  is not the names of the people, places and activities that comprise(s) your life.
Rather, I am asking you to consider the question, what did they (seem) to add to your life, why did you give them (these people and places and activities) your time!?

I want the Reader to consider their lives without the qualification/rationalization/justification that we all impose when we reflect on our lives.

… ‘he was a great friend, even though he was an asshole’… ‘I really liked spending time with her, but I had to because she was family’ … “of course we are happy together! We have beautiful children and a nice home’… ‘I know this is a boring job, but I will stick with it, because otherwise, what will I do?…’maybe I can still pray and maybe its not too late for me…”who will take care of me if I get sick?’…

(These little quotes barely  hint at the myriad of ways that we employ to make the fact that what constitutes ‘our lives’, the essential nature and character, if you will,  is the same today as it was on your very first day at school.)

So?
So what, what is wrong with that, at least I have a life that I can look at and say, ‘hey I’m not doing so bad’!

You are correct, scott.  roger?  you can come back in the room, we have stopped talking about life as if it were totally unpredictable and un-certain. We won’t talk about interchangeability any more.

Well, that was fun, wasn’t it?  (Yes, I am seriously getting ready to close out this Post for today.) (No, I actually don’t have a more satisfying denouement for todays Post)

(writer leaves, house lights stay off…)

Alright, alright. Seeing that we have some new visitors (from Italy and Sweden and Ghana to name a few) and, of course, Sloveniaaa  is in da house!! I will try to impart or at least ’duct tape’ some kind of coherent point to this Post.

If pressed, I would have to say that the point of this (Post)  is that our essential natures (clarks, scotts and rogers) will determine how our lives are experienced.
Having said that, I will remind everyone that the Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the idea that we all have the full range of potential, we are all (potentially) clarks and scotts and rogers.
And despite how this Post reads, we always have the potential to feel, act, or think in the manner of the other two personality types.
In fact, that really is the purpose of the WakefieldDoctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers), to offer a tool for self-improving ourselves by seeing the world from a different perspective.

 

Friends of the Doctrine Jen ( My Skewed View ) with the help of Kristi ( Finding Ninee ) do this thing every Tuesday called Twisted MixTape Tuesday (currently # 8 with a bullet)

Each week a theme/motif/rationale… something common, perhaps not so common, that we, all of us, experience in our efforts to find our way through life. It seems that there are times in life when events gather music to itself, forming a bond between memory and emotion,  incredibly rich in detail, often the very sketchiest of memories and most of the time, these bonds are formed with not the slightest awareness that it is happening. Sometimes years pass and the event (a relationship forms or dissolves, friendship begin or end, people are born and loved ones die) is nearly forgotten, and then a song comes on the radio and the next thing you know you are back there…feeling and re-living.

Allman Brothers ‘It’s Not My Cross to Bear’

Click here to view the embedded video.

Miss Ann…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Allman Brothers ‘Leave My Blues at Home’

Click here to view the embedded video.

misunderstood, missed-opportunity

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hall and Oates ‘She’s Gone’

Click here to view the embedded video.

Hazel…adjustment made with time

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Humble Pie “Halellujah’

Click here to view the embedded video.

Ola leaves, neither of us would have let this happen, had we any choice…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Great Drive last night… Cyndi and Denise and Jennifer!!   A very excellent time was had by all, you  shoulda been there.  All of which is a roundabout way of saying:  if you understand the Wakefield Doctrine and correctly infer the predominant worldview of ‘the other person’, you will know more about them than they know about themselves. But thats not what today’s Post is about. Today’s Post is about….

the Progenitor roger, he say apps is the answer…

(the Question) is a) is there a way that we haven’t tried yet to get more Comments, b) do you want to take a chance and really get out there with the Wakefield Doctrine, b₁) there you go again, finding a length of rope, tying it to a building and then the other end to your ankle, c) You don’t think I can explain it? d) all of the above.

So, I told roger that I would write a ‘setup’ from which he would have both the context and the supporting premise that would allow him to explain his idea about a Wakefield Doctrine app (and how it would benefit our efforts to get the Doctrine out to new Readers and such).

You people ready?  Please signify by nodding your head(s)…. we will wait until you finish reading.   Everyone ready?  Great!!

please give our guest your undivided attention…. roger?

Well… damned nice intro, there, Mr. Progenitor. I’d be honored to address this erudite assembly.
So let me gather my notes, straighten my virtual tie, and walk out to that nicely back-lit virtual podium. Don’t trip on the XLR cables…smile…wave….hello, everyone…thanks for the invite…place looks good…
Nice crowd… everyone’s here…those penetrating red eyes in the darkness…must be Glenn…hey, Bud…lots of new faces, too…Ok, then. If you”ll all take your seats, we’ll get started…

First of all, I’m about the last person you’d want to ask about phone apps. I’ve barely figured out how to use Campbell’s soup cans…and the money I’ve spent on string…plus, the guy on the other end never pulls the string tight enough. Texting is almost impossible, and yes, I’ve been pulled over for typing on a soup can while driving. And the only app tells you how much water to add.
So Clark and I were talking yesterday ( I think he uses a Progresso can ) and the conversation drifted to… yes, phone apps. This is akin to a Neanderthal asking a Cro-Magnon if he got the Fios upgrade yet. ( Answer? No, he hasn’t.)
But most people have pretty damned fancy phones that do all kinds of stuff. You can be in constant contact 24/7, order a pizza, do your taxes, talk to every other device on the planet. This would drive me absolutely batshit crazy. It’s best if I’m somewhat isolated, I’ve found.
And yet…the idea of a Wakefield Doctrine app…I like it.
Just picture this; you’re out doing something somewhere, and you encounter another person who does or says something that just makes no sense.
- the guy who insists on telling your grandmother off-color jokes at Christmas dinner…
- or the quiet new girl at an office meeting dressed in impeccable business attire…and Timberland boots…
- or a boss who manages an office as if it were a big extended family…as long as the family was the Marine Corps…
If you’ve been around this Doctrine thing for any length of time, you know what I mean.
So… please just imagine… a phone app that would instantly bring you to some accessible information that could shed some light on your situation. A text page that gives you a quick rundown on scotts? How to relate to social gatherings of rogers? And are people who just won’t make eye contact all psychopaths? And where did they get those shoes?
Plus, I think there should be a link from the app back to the WD, so you can get the in-depth from the Man. And you can always get a damned hat for your damned head.
I couldn’t say how it might actually work. I just like it. I’m just here to sell the idea.
So how did I do?

As requested by Janine (‘...big sister’) and Kate  (‘...why can’t you apply yourself like her?’), et Stephanie (‘I really don’t think you should spend quite so much time with her, yes I know she seems very nice…but‘) and Dawn, (‘now there is the kind of role model you should be emulating’) here is my contribution to the nearly last (how the hell did that happen?) Friday before Summer begins (?!?#?)

When I was younger, I wanted to…    be whoever I wasn’t.

The world of a young human (and any animal) is comprised of the challenges of the world and examples of how to cope with those challenges. For the very young, the world is all about looking up and looking out to, when we are little we are constantly falling behind and being alone (if only temporarily). Before we grow up we know dependency and rebellion and we become who we are to be, by the age of 5. To be this young is to be a little version of a larger person, however it is not like being a midget, it is more like being a clown; it is not like being un-formed, rather it is about being a grain of sand with the beginnings of layers of nacre; it is not about carrying on tradition, it is about playing according to the Rules.

When I was young I felt that being younger was my responsibility and that I was expected to overcome it. This was not an instruction or implication, direction or demand from anyone, it was my assumption. Being young I did not see (the) forest from the trees, right from wrong, the better part of valor, (that) hard work was its own rewards, or that to the victor goes the spoils. Instead, because I was young (and a clark), I saw that the world was all around me, that people were friendly and mean, strangers were interesting and kind, that school was easy and horrible.

When I was just young and I wanted to be whoever I wasn’t?  …that was not because I didn’t want to be myself. It was because I looked around and saw people (apparently): not concerned with fitting in, getting permission, being self-conscious, resisting the urge to cry, holding back and not striking out, sharing without the need to qualify, being wrong without feeling less than, being happy because they all knew each other, living a life without thought and reflection.

…and so, I looked at the world as being ‘out there’ and I learned how to be intelligent, I discovered a place within where ‘what wasn’t was’, I convinced the people in my world that I felt like they did, and I watched and tried to learn.

…guess I succeeded.

* Thanks to Cyndi for providing the impromptu feature image go to her site Pictimilitude  right now and thank her

Click here to view the embedded video.

Hey, you got questions? We will totally answer them, you know.

clarks: the Outsiders, for them the world is ‘out there’

scotts: the Predators, live to act/act to live

rogers: the Herd Members, they know that the universe is quantifiable and there are Rules (‘referential authority’)

Hey! I got a Comment!  from Noah Conti @ yahoo.com, and he says,

“This post presents clear idea designed for the new visitors of blogging, that really how to do blogging.”

I suspect someone’s soon-to-be-world-famous-personality-types-blog is on someone’s spam list!  lol

Question from Considerer question:

“Yeah I’d like to know my secondary aspect, after all, knowledge is power…”

When you first practice inferring another person’s predominant worldview, you watch a person and look through the ‘lens’ of the three worldviews. (Often, it is helpful to pick which of the three is pretty damned unlikely and then focus and then begin to compare the remaining two)…watching for the sense of consistency between the observed behavior and what you know about the characteristic behavior of the worldview being held up for comparison. Keep doing this until you feel comfortable with your choice. Want to hear 2 encouraging facts? a) you can’t get it wrong¹ and 2) you can’t break it².

From Denise is this Questionment:

“It’s been said around the Doctrine that it’s like learning a second language. The goal being to eventually think in “Doctrine” … woke up today remembering a snippet of dream.”

Good! The goal is to have the perspective of the Doctrine practiced so that it is not work to apply in the course of your day. A note here to Readers who may be expecting more from this personality theory than we intend. Of late, I have been in conversation with Friend of the Doctrine, Molly, on this very question, i.e. does the Doctrine require total commitment in order to have any value to the individual? ( I may not totally appreciate Molly’s position on this topic, but that in and of itself is the reason for allowing that more is better than less, when it comes to the ways that we view the world around us⁵⁾.  I do say that, as a tool for self-development and self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine will prove to be without peer. However, it is still simply a perspective. A way to view the world and the people in it.
Just as becoming fluent in a second (or third or fourth) language, should not interfere with your native language, acquiring an understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine need not cause any conflict with whatever belief system you may choose to employ in your day-to-day, ‘my god! I really thought I knew them better than that! How could they say a thing like that?’…activities. (lol)

So, as with so much in life, the greater the range of your experience in day-to-day living, the better are the chances at getting this thing right!⁶

Readers familiar with the Doctrine, seeing two partially italicized block-quotes, have stopped reading and gotten up to get a re-fill on their coffee, tea or whatever tasty beverage they may be sipping. The common reaction, among Readers familiar with these pages is, ‘oh goody/hot shit! one of those Posts!
If you are a new Reader, let me simply say… the Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective, a tool, a personality theory that,  if you are willing to allow yourself to see the world as being comprised of people who are living in one of three characteristic worldviews, will give you an insight into the behavior of the people in your life. With the Wakefield Doctrine you can know more about the other person than they know about themselves… while they may know the ‘what’ of their behavior, you will know the ‘why’. Warning to new Readers, if you are successful in learning the simple suppositions, then you will begin to see the clarks that are in your life (there is a passing good chance that you yourself are one) and the scotts (we know they are there...) and the rogers (if they’re not on bicycles or in their workshops, they can often be difficult to distinguish from scotts). And….and! if you succeed in being able to see them, there is a really good chance that you will not be able to stop seeing them. Hey, what can I say?

Today’s Post is, in fact, one of those Posts.

To answer the question⁷ asked by Considerer:  well, the best approach is to establish the person’s predominant worldview and then look for anomalies.  Cyndi is a clark (like you didn’t know that in the first encounter…) but there she is, not only doing video Posts (a totally not clarklike activity), she is doing them effectively, more to the point she is enjoying doing them…thriving in that context. So, which of the 3 personality types are the natural performer, the front man?  …exactly!
Today’s 2 videos are from Jimi Hendrix. Now, he might be confusing because his secondary aspect is so very strong. Man! he’s got to be a scott!!  right?  well, most of us would go with that pick… (see footnote 2) until you see an interview of him. Then you totally know that he was a clark. So, the rogerian Reader is quick to ask, “how do you know he’s not a scott with a secondary clarklike aspect, huh? how do you know that?” Great question.  The answer to this is the same as the basic description of the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘how does the person appear to relate themselves to the world around them?’

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

1) if you guess wrong and continue to try and understand a person using the Doctrine, you will see the inconsistencies, example: you think you have a scott but occasionally you see him acting like a girl³, then you make a note to yourself, ‘hey! wait a minute  this might just be a roger!

2)  by this we mean that, lets say you decide you are a clark, but you also find yourself totally obsessed with genealogy and think ‘damn I guessed wrong, now what?  Not a problem. Calling yourself a scott if you are really a clark, does not even change a thing. At any point you can go back and hold up the lens (of the three worldviews) and see which of the three your behavior seems most in focus in…er  with… whatever. As you learn more about the characteristics and gain a deeper insight and a certain fluency, you will want to do this, just for the fun of it!

3) scotts and most clarks will get this joke, if you do not, quick write us a Comment and ask!  I can esplain everything!⁴

4) though it will no longer be funny… ha ha

5) probably only true for clarks… seeing how we can accept anything (as being possible)

6) promise that is the last clark-centric joke in this Post.

7) lol yeah! I know… we tend to wander a bit, hey all the better to appreciate the questions!

The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we all develop and grow up in one of three characteristic ‘personal realities’ (we call them worldviews) and it is the nature of these worldviews that accounts for what is referred to as personality type. The Wakefield Doctrine goes so far as to say that personality types (at least in terms of the three types found in this here Doctrine here) are nothing more (or less) than successful adaption to the conditions one finds oneself living in. If you are a child and you wake up and find yourself living in a reality¹ in which you are an Outsider it is inevitable that you will learn to:

• avoid the spotlight (the better to avoid having to answer questions relating to ‘who the hell are you and how did you get in here?!?’) and you
• develop a very acute sense of extrapolation which allows you to put together seemingly un-related facts, sentence fragments, ideas and inferences, (the better to understand what is going on among the real people you find yourself surrounded by, they all clearly know something that you should know but do not) and you
• discover that you are creative in ways that seem to start where everyone else starts but somehow (your creative efforts) tie together parts of your world that you did not realize even existed, never mind were related, (the better to feel that you are not useless and without value, having no openly recognized credentials that allow you to belong)

But today is Mother’s Day! So what does the Wakefield Doctrine have to say about Mothers and their Day and us… ?

Well mostly the Wakefield Doctrine says that ‘if you can succeed in correctly inferring the worldview of the person (‘the Mother’ in this case) then you will know more about them than they will know about themselves‘. Pretty reasonable statement, non?  (oh! oh!! almost forgot!!  we also say… ‘this Doctrine thing, what with all the insight and understanding and more-than-they-know-about-themselves and such?  well, it’s for you, not for them. )

In any event. mothers are:

1. clarks  ’cause they totally got you to love reading, cause they made more food than could possibly be consumed, were self-less to a fault…so frickin much that (if you happen to be a clark, yourself) you noticed that they felt different and less than the other mothers…and this when you were still like 5 or 6 years old!
2. scotts because all your friends wanted to go to your house, (this at all age stages from 5 up to 16 and both genders), she was totally able to get everyone to pay attention and she would even yell at your friends (and their parents didn’t get mad!) she was so energetic that (if you happen to be a scott, yourself) you noticed that pushing was alright up until everyone got it right, and it wasn’t to be mean or anything… it was fun and
3. rogers she gave you the sense that there really wasn’t anything that you could not be prepared for, if only you focused and studied and that family was the point of it all….family history to put more of a point on it, the adventures and accomplishments of family members (living or dead) were yours…provided you worked to add to this list of accomplishments and she taught you (if you happened to be a roger, yourself) to work hard and not be shy along as you had something you could be proud of and everyone would understand

Happy Mother’s Day to those who are celebrating, as well as those being celebrated.

Click here to view the embedded video.

1)  when we say reality, we totally mean reality…. not ‘just because you don’t want to face it‘ and not..’you’re being stubborn’ and totally not, ‘it’s as plain as the nose on your face, just open your eyes and face reality‘  Sorry. The Doctrine says, to the degree that differences are ascribed to the three worldviews, that is the reality for the person inhabiting the reality in question. Give up on the notion that, if for instance, you are a scott and you are talking to a clark about how to interview for a job, they will see what you see. Not only will they not see (what you see) there will be things in their version of the job interview that plain does not exist (for you) in your reality. This is the core genius of the Doctrine.

hey, call us tonight! 8 to 8:45 pm  we promise to be there *

Our steadfast friends, Janine and Kate and Stephanie and Kate and Amy and Considerer and… Cyndi  do week in retrospect Posts. Well, actually not all of them…just a few of them, but they are still Friends of the Doctrine so go read, already. In any event, at the Doctrine we don’t so much do a ‘week in review’ as much as a ‘since-we-started-writing-this in review’ Posts. (Mostly, but not exclusively on weekends and then only when I read one of those ‘Related Post’ suggestions at the bottom of the Post, usually I use the ones that either a) make me laugh or 2) make me think, ‘what?!?! I wrote that?  what the hell!

So here you are:

‘but, thats impossible!’ clarks, the Wakefield Doctrine and changing reality

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine!  The only self-improvement Movement that is based on the fact that all people are born with the potential to experience the world in one of three characteristic ways, as a clark or (as a) scott or (as a ) roger.

(What do you mean, tomorrow’s guest  ‘is not lined up yet’? How can it be Thursday frickin morning and no guest arranged for Video Friday!!??)

The reason that we call the Wakefield Doctrine a ‘self-improvement Movement’  is that, despite the fact that we all settle into one of  three personality types (usually by the age of 4 or 5), we never lose the capacity to experience the world the way that the other two types do!   As  a self-improvement movement,  we believe that change and development can only come from the individual. Furthermore, it is our conviction that most conventional approaches, belief systems and treatment modalities such as  MBTA, Oscar, Meyers & Briggs, and colorgenics*,  totally miss the mark because they insist on a  focus predicated on what is wrong with the individual.  This is not inconsistent with the ‘disease model’ that dominates most sort of the disease model, ‘cept they are talking about your life, your actual reality that you live and breathe in every day. They want you to believe that it is you that is the problem, not ‘the world’ (or the people in it).

(Seriously…you are supposed to have at least a hint at who tomorrow’s Video interview guest was going to be!!  “We have the rest of today”…now what the hell is that supposed to mean?!)

This is different!  Here at the Doctrine we say, ‘hey, it is not you! It’s the world that you are living in!!’ That’s right, you read that correctly. We maintain that most of the problems that people encounter, on a day-to-basis is a world that is a perfect reflection of their personality type. A clark will encounter a world that has everything they need to be healthy, yet perpetually dissatisfied outsiders; the scotts reading this will look up from their computers and see: prey and predators and a world of action and adventure and our rogerian friends will bask in the glow of knowing that they are the center of the universe and (because of this smug knowledge) will know that all is right with the world.

( So, what you are telling me is that we don’t have a guest lined up for tomorrow’s Video Friday??! I don’t care who you thought you had! No, we are not going to do a re-run! Get someone on the phone and set up the interview).

Sorry about the slightly contrived-sounding asides in today’s Post. The fact of the matter is that we have come to like the idea of interviewing people for Video Friday, but the person I thought I might get, I still have not made the connection with in order to do the interview. Anyone of you Readers up for a telephone interview about the Wakefield Doctrine and it’s benefits? Write a quick comment (your email won’t show publicly, of course), I will follow-up and let you know how these interviews are done. Actually, no secret there; I get in my car, put the Wakefield Doctrine hat on my damn dashboard and dial your number. I ask questions about what you like about the Doctrine and how you explain it to people, we chat a little and thats it! All in about 8 minutes. So write me a Comment, already!

Well, lets put up a video and we will hope for the best. Hey, if tomorrow you have to sit through a video of a clark explaining about clarks, don’t blame us! Hey! did you know that Jimi Hendrix was a clark? Well he was!

 

Click here to view the embedded video.

(house lights down…music comes up… FTSF Productions  Produced and Directed by the ‘Bloggarini de celebrini ’  Janine (‘the Machine’) ‘Confessions of a Mommyaholic‘, Kate ( ‘no, you didn’t!..’) ‘Can I Get Another Bottle of Whine ’, Stephanie (“…you really think you’re up to this?”) ‘Mommy, for real‘ and Dawn (“…who keeps them all out of blogger jail”) ‘Dawn’s Disaster’

“This Summer I plan to….  ”

(since this is the Wakefield Doctrine and we maintain that there are three characteristic worldviews (personal realities), it would only be right that we finish this sentence in three ways**)

worldview of the Outsider (aka clarks): ‘…hope’

worldview of the Predator (aka scotts): ” fuck!!!! yeah!!!!”

worldview of the Herd Member (aka rogers): (smiles)

* …cultural reference to cartoon feline, if you need to know, write a Comment

** don’t forget! you have one predominant worldview and the (possibility of) secondary and tertiary worldviews that usually result in people saying, “Hey Doctrinaires! sometimes I know I am a roger but other times I must be a scott! What gives?” What gives is that a) these worldviews are characteristical and not exact, the same in every damn tiny detail yo,  2) the secondary and tertiary aspects shade and influence the world…  why don’t ya just call us Saturday Night, we’ll explain ever thang