Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )
Good Saturday Night Drive this weekend… Ms. AKH ( dans la voiture ) , DS#1 and Alx showed up in the dashboard so close together, that the air conditioning came on all by itself!
The conversation began with a discussion of how the predatory impulse is observed being expressed differently between scottian male and scottian female. The consensus: for the females weapon of choice is seduction (sexual and otherwise for the females) and ‘flat-out’ ankle-biting, bark-at-the-moon aggression for the male-type scotts. The omniversation then meandered into, ‘why it is the scotts (male) always push things just a little too far, usually in the context of joke telling’… (at which point Alx described the first joke in his comedy act).
About 15 minutes into the Drive we heard our woman announcer’s voice say, (in that self-assured yet totally reassuring tone: “…the Caller…” of course we all figured it was Molly showing up a little late, but to our surprise, it was the Progenitor roger!
And so the conversation veered into more gentle pastures, all participants being considerate of the famously-refined rogerian sensibilities, but as a yin to the (scottian) yang, the resultant exchange of thoughts and ideas was quite enjoyablistic. In fact, we all learned three things about clarks, scotts and rogers, consider:
***that ‘hobby’ referred to as Civil War Re-Enacting? rogers to a man (with the occasional scott who misread the invitations and really thought he could use live ammunition or, at very least, shoot the loud and noisy cannon off and startle things) and some supporting clarks ( after all, to make an impressive show of rank and file you need bodies and no body enjoys taking orders more than a clark)
***the thing that rogers like about the Re-Enacting is that it allows them an escape from the daily hustle ‘n bustle of the modern world and they get to see what it was like to live in the old days of history
***rogers, given an opportunity will be the providers (in a given household) which is interesting, in that this is in distinction to a) being the homemaker or b) being the matriarch***scotts will push everyone on the shoulder (figuratively or literally) for the express purpose of getting a response/reaction,
***the reaction that scotts look for when they are being pushy or noisy or obnoxious is always the same: ranking (if you push back there will be a fight for dominance, if you don’t then you are in the pack and therefore submissive)
***the distinction between rogers and scotts in terms of sociability, the rogers are very sociable and very good at being attractive and engaging but the purpose is simply to form a herd (around themselves), a scott on the other hand, is very social but is looking for their next meal***clarks can imagine both points of view (as a roger or as a scott), but are limited in that they (the clarks) know that they are just points of view
***clarks will on occasion slap down a scott with as little thought and concern as a human housebreaking a 6 week old puppy who has just ‘had an accident’ in the living room, which explains why clarks and scotts make such good friends
***clarks have nearly endless patience for the demands of rogers, mostly because rogers have (in abundance) what clarks lack emotional attachment to life
Molly…Molly…Molly Mark your calendar for next week, yo. ….and, Molly? the principles contained in the Doctrine imply that you will enjoy the following video, unless, of course, your clarklike aspect detects a trap/threat of some sort, in which case you will:
- a) express a total indifference to said video
- b) find an element implied in the video which forms the basis of a serious question
- c) smile and quickly glance to your left for no apparent reason
About clarkscottroger
Agreed. The “metaphoricalistic” (superfragilistic) pic is naivete and in fact represents a weakness found in both clarks and rogers ….the same but not the same.
But more to the point….taking orders is NOT enjoyed by clarks. You must validate and/or qualify your statement.
OK…’Taking orders is enjoyable to clarks
Enjoyable so that…..clarks can not follow the orders as given, offer a better way to do the thing, bring attention to themselves…..
What you missed if you just happened to miss the Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive. Plus a video!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZMNG0ACjr0&feature=player_embedded
Love the song! But are you sure it is the principles in the doctrine and not my facebook posts that implied I would?
…I’m still trying to figure out what scotts do with ‘their next meal’. I get the whole wildlife picture, but I’ve yet to see any cannibalism, even by the most scottain…
Why, of course we’re sure!* (lol)
this is a metaphor ( or is that simile?…damn, always get them mixed up! Alx yo! A little help here?) for the predatory behavior (associated with the scottian personality type) which is, in turn, it’s primary behavioral metaphor/simile.. it is not intended as literal, although I have known some scotts in my time. Ask the Progenitor roger for insight into the rogerian/scottian nutritional nexus, unless he is in a bad mood, (in which case, he will advise you that this is all interesting, but no one really believes any of it), he can give you a sense of the interdependency that gives rise to this imagery.
And the reason for this use of metaphor is that it facilitates the connection/association of characteristics of the three types that simply does not happen in other personality theory type systems.
* while I see many of your posts of music and bands on ‘the Facebook’, I cannot claim to have been aware of the totality of your musical suggestions ( I would defer to DS#1 or AKH on this), while I see a lot of music of the 80s and 90s, it appears on first blush to be a lot of heavy-metal baby-boy-bands. Seriously, who does not see our Ms. Momsen as anything other than a clark?
She definitely appeared to be a clark!
totally… but where the Doctrine is both fun and interesting, challenging yet very, very useful is found in the answer (to the question) why do we know she is a clark/how do we know she is a clark!
(often a very subjective assessment), but that we know that she is a clark speaks to how she appears to regard the world… which is to say, what kind of world is our Miss Momsen experiencing?