the Wakefield Doctrine

There is much to talk about but first, the fun of fashion, Doctrine Style. Envy the owners of the scottian heads that will soon be adorned by this fine hat.             

A fine hat for your own damn scottian head.

 Look on this, and feel the desire grow within your heart on behalf of your un-hatted head.  Pretty nice, you say?  Damn right is pretty nice.  Maybe even too nice!  

The lucky two with these hats (Ms. AKH and Ms. Pixieblonde) are both fortunate and deserving of your envious thoughts, you should accept that you must earn such fashion.  There will be new opportunity for both Men and Women of the clarklike, scottian and rogerian varieties, to earn such  headcoverings.            

Alright, enough with the hats already.  They have theirs and you can get yours if you really want to, but we are not here, writing this to sell hats.

We are here writing this to sell* the Wakefield Doctrine (aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).
And by *sell we mean present to as many as qualified** people as possible the principles and practical applications*** of said Doctrine.
And by **qualified we mean  people who upon visiting this blog and reading it’s content are capable of loosening the grip of  dogma  enough to allow the overlay of the description of the world that the Doctrine offers.
And by ***principles and practical applications of the Doctrine, we mean  it offers an alternative, an adjunct to the way most of us interpret the actions, behaviors and intentions of the people we live and work and play with every day of our lives****.
And by****lives, we mean the increasingly rigid lens through which we not only perceive the world we exist in, but we also use  as the template which informs our experiences as we live our lives.          

Let’s talk about practical applications (of the Doctrine)….the Doctrine  tells us that only one of the three (clarks, scotts and rogers) consider  a tool that is useful in altering themselves (and thereby their realities) to be a valuable thing.  In other words to change themselves.  You know who you are.
Another of the three will, if engaged sufficiently in the Wakefield Doctrine, consider the most valuable is as a tool to change others, changing the view that the world has of them.
Finally, the third (of the three) will view the Doctrine  as a tool, a weapon, to aid them in dealing with the hostile world they live in.         

Tired?  Bored?  You want what?  Come on people, learn first then have fun.         

(Alright…damn, I wonder if Rev Moon had to put up with this…alright…short break for you attention-span challenged Readers….I see you out there  scott.    Jeez,  try to bring the Secret of the Universe to the masses and what do you get…”More videos!!” and they are not even mine, if it wasn’t for the youtube we probably would have been shut down months ago.  OK  here you go…)        

(Free hat to the Reader who correctly identifies which of the three Ray was; to enter you  need to write a Comment at the bottom of this Post.  You must tell us which Ray is (clark, scott or roger) and why that is the case.  Free hat to the first 5 correct responses recieved by 4:00 pm Monday March 8th)       

OK.  Back to work. 

 Well, that is helpful, no?  

Alright, we have covered a lot of ground.  No, there will be no questions from the floor, roger.  The eyes I see have a distinct glaze.  

But in all seriousness, read this shit and look around you today, right now. Pick one person only and decide whether they are a clark, scott or roger. And keep checking their behavior against the Doctrine.  I guarentee that once you find one, the others will be much more obvious.  You will probably spot a roger first, but any of the three will do.  Personally, I think it would be easier and more fun to spend a little extra time and find your nearest clark. (The clarklike females are totally easy to spot).  Don’t bother with which of the three you are at this point.  Not important.  You just want to spot the clarks, and the scotts and the rogers around you.  Like one of those old puzzles in the back of kids magazines or Sunday supplements,  “Find the tigers in the jungle”; once you discern the first pattern, the rest jump out at you.  

Now don’t think we don’t know that which of the three (clarks, scotts or rogers) you happen to be, will have an effect  on how you respond to this…but by virtue of the fact that you are still reading, still with us is proof that you have what it takes to apply the Doctrine in your own life. 

Good luck, don’t forget the contest and don’t worry so much… 

Hey, its a mid-week Post!  What say we go easy on the lessons and relax for a spell.  (There will be much to cover, but we’ll get to that in the end of the week Post).

We are always looking for different and (hopefully) interesting ways to present the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers), the thinking is the more varied the context that this thing is presented in, the greater the likelihood that our Readers will be able to apply these principles to their own lives.

So, what is more universal than an Advice Column?  Better yet, an Advice Column that focuses on relationships.  To that end we have asked Ms. AKH to help us out.  She has written a number of Posts that have been quite well received,  one on couples (from a scottian perspective) click here. and she has also written for our newest member of the faculty at Millard Fillmore High (as student teacher) click here.

(There’s the background of our Contributing Downspring, let’s see what Ms. AKH has for us…)

WD:  Ms. AKH Welcome!  After your Post on scottian/rogerian couples, we have heard a lot of interest in how the Doctrine can help people work through ‘relationship problems’.  We would like to pose some questions to you and maybe you would consent to be our Advice Columnist (for couples).
Before we start, in your Post on columns, you spoke so glowingly about your relationship with a roger, how are you two doing?

Ms.AKH:  Well, you’ll never believe it.  That rogerian guy I was seeing turned out to be an asshole.  Out of the blue he just stopped calling me. Wouldn’t return my phone calls either or respond to my e-mails trying to find out what happened.  It actually worked out well because I was starting to “not feel it” anymore anyway.  But still, he could’ve had enough balls to respect me and to let me know why.  Went from adoring me to ignoring me. What a typical weak roger.  Such a fucking coward.  Personally I think that we scottian females are too much for a rogerian male to handle.

WD:  Oh.  I see, but what are we to learn about the scottian half of a couple like this (your case)?  I am tempted to think there is a tendency of the scottian female to tire of the routine, hear the call of ‘the hunt’ if you will? Not for nothing, but we have all seen cats bat the little, soon-to-be-dinner mouse around for fun.  As a people (scotts) live for the hunt, perhaps a steady diet of pleasant company gets a little boring?

Ms AKH:  Love your analogy!  I think it depends on the level of confidence of the roger.  Certainly the scottian females enjoy batting the little mouse around, the mouse easily being a roger.  This can be satisfied in a scottian/rogerian relationship if the roger is strong enough and the scott is not overly predatory.  That being said, not all scottian females are as predatory as let’s say scottian males.  So my conclusion is that if the rogerian male is strong enough to withstand the antics of the scottian female, the relationship could be successful.  Being with a roger would both ground her and give her the upper hand as it were (in her mind) that she needs.      

WD:  We have a more generalized question about couples.  We all agree that the scottian female/rogerian male couple is very easy to identify.  What of the scott/clark couples.  How would we identify such a couple?  And what special characteristics do they have?

Ms. AKH:  From the outside, the scott would appear to be the “stronger” of the two.  In fact, the clark would be perceived as the subordinate one due to his seemingly lack of interest/interaction and subdued nature.  However, don’t be fooled by this.  The cogs are constantly turning.  And though the scott may think of himself/herself as being the “leader of the pack” and therefore superior, it is important to remember that the clark is extremely cerebral and always “on the hunt” mentally.  They are a pair of hunters with the scott being outwardly aggressive while the clark is inwardly insatiable.     

WD:  Since we are on the topic, do you think that a scott/scott couple is very likely?  Would they not eat each other… (not necessarily in the good way)?

Ms AKH:  You’re making me blush!  There are many scott/scott relationships out there which easily spotted, but inevitably unsuccessful. These are the turbulent ones.  Filled with constant battles, this couple would be in constant turmoil fueled by each other’s strong personalities.  For example, the couples who call the police for restraining orders against each other.  But then you have the other scott/scott relationships which are successful.  If both partners have the same life goals, they would be a couple to contend with.  Very ambitious and successful in reaching their ideals.  Just imagine, two hunters against the world.  Kind of a scary proposition. They would no doubt be able to catch their prey quite easily and effectively. It would be child’s play to reach and even surpass the goals that they intend to achieve.  So yes, a scott/scott couple is possible.

WD:  Thank you for these insights.  In keeping with starting a little ‘Advice for the Lovelorn’ column, I would like to pose a specific question and get your input.

(WD):  As a young clark I had a relationship with a scottian female, very ‘exciting’ …(that’s all you get from me, I am a clark, lol) Anyway, long story short.  She dumps me for a roger!  Like no notice, just withdraws and then (him) being a roger, it was all, “hey it’s not our fault it just happened, you need to get on with your life, clark.  Please dont hate me…”  So what could I have done differently?  Is there something in a scottian female/clarklike male that is inherently unstable?

Ms AKH:  Unless you wanted to be someone other than yourself, there really isn’t anything you could’ve done without compromising your integrity.  Your strong point is outwitting others mentally.  I’m not so sure about being inherently unstable.  In this case, I would have to say that the scottian female may have felt threatened and that she wasn’t able to feel she was in control of the relationship.  This would explain leaving you for the roger.  A roger is, afterall, non-confrontational and easy to control. Rogers pretty much go with the flow and are followers.  And this would give the scott the role of “leader of the pack” she so desperately needs.  Being in control without being questioned from a roger.

WD:  Thank you, MS AKH.  I am sure our Readers will have their own questions in the near future, perhaps we should plan on making this a more regualr feature here at the Doctrine.

Well, that was informative and fun!  There is a place, right below for your Comments  or questions.  Don’t be shy.  And no one will call you at home and ask you follow-up questions, so lets get some Reader participation here.

Mr. B, some traveling music?