Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

The most non-confrontational day of the week.

Hey! There’s a topic!

Confrontation:from Medieval Latin confrontare “assign limits to; adjoin,” and confrontari “be contiguous to,”

Well, who said “That Wakefield Doctrine! Those principles are like so inclined to write illustration of themselfs.”

(cue: the Everything Rule)

What might we learn examining the concept of confrontation as manifested by the three predominant worldviews of the Doctrine?

• clarks (the Outsider) no way, nope. won’t do it. go ahead you can have the (football, boyfriend, bicycle, girlfriend-to-be*) …except when it becomes a matter of something important.¹ (lol to the facetious examples of contested possessions)
• scotts (the Predator) Hey I thought you’d never ask! lets dance… hurry up before someone able to wreck my fun comes by
• rogers (the Herd Members) First, you asked for this. Second (wait, let me do a quick Herd assessment… ok, given your status, I think we have the necessary quorum)

There you have it. The social dynamics of confrontation as manifested in the three predominant worldviews.

Note: rogers only engage in active (one-on-one) aggression when assured of a sufficient size Herd. Fun Fact: when confronting a clark who just happened into the situation, a roger can ‘assemble’ a Herd from whatever bystanders or ‘trying-to-get-to-class’ random people available at the moment. If the clark has some standing, then more planning and logistical effort is required.

* applies to male clarks only, clarklike female very not so much

1) sorry, no quick description handy. if you’re a clark reading this, you know what we mean. (and woe betide the scott or roger who tries to mess with ‘it’.)