rogers:

• lashing out: ‘your most trusted friend, in the midst of an everyday, pretty-damn enjoyable conversation, the kind of give and take possible only with (you believe) this person (as opposed to your scottian friend or clarklike associates) and out of nowhere, apropos of nothing observable, they make a statement that is devastating on all levels. you are taken-aback and/or speechless. (sort like, “Yeah, by the way, you’re such an asshole” but …tailored to you in the context of your friendship.
  This is ‘lashing out’. All rogers have the gift/talent/capacity to find the most painful point and stick it to you.
  The value of the Wakefield Doctrine is not, in this instance, about understanding the roger, (Despite all the urgency to figure out they would say such a thing.)
  The value of the Wakefield Doctrine, (in this instance), is about understanding the clark. You, (who at the hypothetical moment following being the object of a ‘lashing out’), are totally  asking yourself, “What did I do/say to bring that on?”
  The value of the Wakefield Doctrine to a clark is this: “Nothing. You did nothing to bring it on/ instigate / cause /or otherwise be the reason they said what they said. They are a roger. It is what a roger does.
  You have nothing to figure out/learn/discover about the instance except for the fact that when rogers lash out, it’s them, not you
• referential authority for a latter footnote