Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 5

[Shannon]

I've read some that we men divide our friendships and connections with men by instinct like we would be ready to go to war - by ordering things in status and hierarchies. But if the TAM disregard status as he is his own source of status - wouldn't that mean that it disrupts men's most intuitive way of working together?

A transcendent alpha can exist within and outside heirarchies simultaneously, and indeed, almost always does in one sense or another.  If he did not, then he would be unrestrained by basic societal laws and norms to such a degree that he would not recognize them as determining factors for how to reasonably limit his behavior, which ironically would require that he not be a transcendent alpha.  TA is mindful of what is good for himself, without disregarding what is good for others.  

Now that said, yes, TA does disrupt most normal male interactions if his TAM-ness is recognized.  Most guys won't know what to make of him.  They may threaten him, ignore him, think he is "weird" or decide they are intrigued, depending on the specifics.  But in every heirarchy-based social discourse, someone who simply does not recognize the heirarchy will not be understood, or appreciated.  In some cases, they are seen as a threat, thus the attack response.  This is usually tied into the identity of the individuals in the group - and especially the leader - as having a specific role and level of control.  Take that away and their whole world is thrown into chaos, and if it's bad enough, there will be a fear response that leads typically to being attacked.

Most TAMs avoid that by being more subtle or avoiding such groups and traps.

And even if it "only" make men see this man as the leader - it's maybe not always the best leader for the particular situation - where "natural" status selection would be better at picking the best leader.

TAMs don't care if they lead, in most cases.  They lead themselves, and that's enough for them.  They don't need power over others because they have the self mastery and maturity that makes it unnecessary.  In cases where a TAM is in a leadership position of others, such as head of household, co-head of household, manager, military, etc. they tend to lead more by example and try to do their thing and allow others to do their thing, only making changes when the result is not going to lead to the goal.  The tighter the goal specs, the more control they are forced to exert, but they're not power hungry, or power crazed individuals.  They can handle power without getting lost in it, or to it. They are fair and balanced in their execution of their leadership and power.