I've never felt quite like I was comfortably nestled in the mainstream of thought. I'm good with that. In fact, I find that I am often cognitively drawn to the kind of thinking that colors a bit outside the lines.
Perhaps it's in my nature. Or perhaps it's the result of my primitive understanding of chaos theory - new birth (genesis) begins on the outer fringes of order. Or perhaps it's from that analytical side of me which questions why we continue to use approaches, solutions, systems, protocols that have consistently yielded average or low results. Sadly, it seems, that the mainstream is most accurately described by words/phrases like safety, conformity, politically correct, low risk.
Why not tinker with something that's broken? What harm in challenging that which ain't working?
My lovely bride of 39 years (Moe) often and correctly advises me to be careful in this regard. She reminds me regularly that I need not be a "distraction." She is not at all opposed to edgy thinking. Rather, she understands innately that we can marginalize ourselves by being too distracting - in the way we dress, the way we speak, the stuff we buy, the habits we adopt, or the sensibilities we offend. Moe is right, of course (I suppose I should try to warm to fashion in line with the current decade).
From a leadership perspective, a degree of social conformity allows for others to safely consider our ideas/thoughts/proposals without endangering their own social status. We can operate slightly out of the mainstream of thought, without jumping completely off the cliff. Nobody wants to charge over the cliff all guns blazing.