Enstrom Was a Psychologist

I guess the answer to that is you have to find someone willing to explore the existential roots of why almond Enstroms is a crumbly shitshow. Maybe we should all stop looking for toffee and direct our intention towards an energy that will sustain us, not excite our pleasure pathways for twenty minutes, if that.

It is like in that fresh phase with a new roommate you found off craigslist— all cordialities packaged neatly like Enstroms toffee. After that first taste of benign class, like hey maybe this won’t end up on my thighs in two weeks, overpriced decadences always go crumbly as we question the sifting tides of life-decisions. And of course we forget the source of the erosion or why we have a jiggly ass and we buy that god-damn toffee again—except this time its not toffee its shortbread, quaintly package to belie the fact that this treat will treat you the same as the last morsel and others before.

We choose to recognize flounders as externally determined and our fierceness as obvious. Where does this urge to place blame on the object of our interest instead of our decision to pursue sed object come from? Can we not recognize the role we play in the demise of our relationships? We instigate, subconsciously, certain traits in others—via projection, introjection—we morph into different versions of ourselves due to the social desirability bias.

The social desirability bias completely dominates dysfunctional romantic relationships; we behave as we perceive society, people or our new beau would like us to behave. Is our reality truly a social construct? Is there such a thing as true individuality? Can we ever be autonomous as social beings? If we are nothing but a compilation of cognitive schemas, biases and psychological phenomena, how can we ever expect to peel back the layers to share an experience of ‘raw being’ with someone? And if we feel a crack in the pristine connection, could we be brave enough to confront it?