the Wakefield Doctrine

the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers

the Wakefield Doctrine (…scott/roger…couples in love…take 2…)

with 2 comments

**Before we continue with our study of the rogerian male/scottian female Couple, a word about Comments:

We are seeing an increasing and relatively steady Reader/Visit rate from the UK as well as Central and Western US.  To these Readers we say:
“Welcome! The free ride is over.  If you are still following this blog, it must be assumed you are assimilating ideas contained in the Wakefield Doctrine.  That’s great, but we want more.  We want you to contribute/comment/feedback.  This is vitally important at this juncture. And don’t worry about asking stupid questions, you know the old saying1
At the bottom of this Post is a place for Comments, when you are done reading today’s Post, click on it and Comment.  Hell, even if it is only in order to identify your ‘type’ (Doctrine-wise), it will be useful to know how many clarks and scotts and rogers are making up the current reader demographic.  In the words of the  Lady2  ‘You’ve been told’

To continue our examination of the scottian female/rogerian male that we started in a previous Post.  We left the discussion with the idea that the interdependency inherent in a Couple-hood like this would be quite interesting.  AKH (a Downspring) was gracious enough to spend her time in order to give a us ‘view’ of the relationship from the scottian perspective (or perhaps better to say, ‘from the perspective of one particular scott’).  It is invaluable for those of us (clarks and rogers) who simply cannot see this view.

(AKH, if you please):

This material contains matters which may be subjective as they apply to The Wakefield Doctrine.  Reader discretion is advised….
First of all, my boyfriend Greg (not established long enough to be considered “partners” yet) is predominately a rogerian guy.  Honest to God!! Being a scottian female myself, this post really hit home.  It elicited a rather loud Holy Shit! response to say the least.  From what I’ve learned to be the tell-tale signs of the clark/scott/rogers of the world you’d think that it wouldn’t have been such a surprise reading this post.  The fact of the matter is that I never directly applied this knowledge to my own relationship (stop shaking your head).  And you’re thinking “How the hell could you not?”  Don’t have an answer to that one.  So I will now attempt to enter (my) uncharted territory as it applies to the rogerian male in a relationship.
Ours is a well-balanced, harmonious relationship.  Our good sense of humor plays off of each other, often laughing at ourselves.  And we goad each other on.  And yes, we’re both smart and good-looking.  Don’t mean to sound vain, but it is what it is.  OK, enough re-iterating from the post (but it’s so spot on!).
To preface, from my female scottian perspective, Greg couldn’t be more suited for me.  He’s VERY attentive and puts me on a pedestal (what more could a scottian girl ask for?). When we’re out together I am proud to show the world that he’s with ME.  I gloat over the fact that this very handsome guy chose ME.  And he enjoys that.  Don’t get me wrong, looks aren’t everything, but they certainly don’t hurt.  He feeds my ego without even knowing it.  So, without further ado, on to the question at hand:  What’s up with those rogers?
Rogerian guys are usually very passive.  Never wanting to rock the boat so to speak.  However, sometimes that passivity can be misconstrued as laziness or even disinterest.  They are eager to please, but not at the cost of allowing another to take advantage of them.  They will and do venture from their herd-like mentality given it is worth it for the “right” person and as a result become more outstanding, more independent if you will. In my particular case I don’t feel as though he was necessarily of a strong herd mentality so much as just following the status quo.  Wait a minute, was that a contradiction?  Oh it’s all so confusing!  No black and white in the world of the clark/scott/rogers.  Because we all have some of each within us, it’s sometimes difficult to put things in a nicely-wrapped gift box.  Particularly in this response as I am honestly unable to be entirely objective given my relationship with my rogerian boyfriend.
Perhaps due to my limited scottian personality (did she really just say that??) I’m trying to express a need to be viewed as one in a relationship with someone who IS strong and independent. And Greg is.  A scottian female would not want to be associated with someone who is weak.  It would be too easy, if not downright boring.
Moving along, the rogerian guys can be the class clowns and laugh at themselves easily.  It doesn’t bother them too much to be the butt of the joke.  They also enjoy laughing at others, usually not with mal-intent.  They’re goal-oriented and when serious just might surprise you by their strong convictions. They are, for the most part, agreeable.  But not to the point of being submissive.  Rogerian men are non-confrontational which works well for the scottian counterpart who deems herself as being somewhat superior.  In a scottian/rogerian relationship the individual characteristics balance each other out quite well and is satisfying for both.  The rogerian guy is very loyal, caring, loving, unselfish and a good listener with a heart of gold.
All of this being said, a scottian female could not be happier to have a rogerian guy.  Am I babbling yet? I’ll quit while I’m ahead (if that).

Thank you AKH.

Speaking of scottian female (perspectives)…. you need to see the following vids.  Jesus Christ!  After what I said about understanding from another’s perspective and all that ‘walk-a-mile-in-someone-else’s-mocassins’ crap, along come the following two views of Couplehood.  (And this Post is about Couplehood/Coupleness/Coupleosity).

Watch and be amazed. (A free hat to any Reader who successfully explains the commonality between these two videos).

Now for something really suggestive…

click HERE

Come Slovenians, Comment!  Don’t worry about language differences, this is the damn internet, I’ll figure something out.

1. ‘There are no stupid questions, only your questions…

2. The Lady: if you work really, really, really hard and understand the Doctrine cold, you can ask again and maybe we will tell you about her. (She is wonderful)


2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. What I “read” AKH writing is that rogerian men are well suited to scottian woman because it satisfies their conscious/unconscious desire/need to be dominated. No, do not go there with the stereotype – there are many methods of domination. Conversely, it allows scottian woman to be themselves more readily (with rogerian men)than say a clarklike male who will challenge the scottian woman.


    January 15, 2010 at 9:59 am

    • Thank you for that nicely-wrapped gift box:)
      Kudos to you!


      January 19, 2010 at 7:52 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: