When Emotional Chaos Feels Like Chemistry
Why we confuse intensity with connection and how our nervous systems mistake drama for love
You know the feeling. The spark, the instant magnetism. It’s not just attraction, it’s urgency. It feels electric, intense, irresistible. But why do these connections so often spiral into emotional chaos? Why do we chase the relationships that feel like fire, even though we’ve been burned before?
The Neuroscience of "Chemistry"
What we often call "chemistry" is our nervous system firing signals we learned long before we started dating. It's emotional activation, the body's alarm bells recognizing something familiar, even if it's harmful. Research in neuroscience suggests this is driven by dopamine and adrenaline responses, which activate reward and pleasure centers in the brain, making chaotic relationships feel stimulating and addictive (Fisher, Aron, & Brown, 2005).
Studies show that repeated exposure to unpredictable, inconsistent care or affection can wire the brain to perceive instability as normal and even desirable (Levine & Heller, 2010). This explains why the calm, stable person can feel boring, while the chaotic, unpredictable partner feels thrilling.
Our brain thrives on familiarity. If our early relationships taught us that love is unpredictable, volatile, or conditional, we'll feel a strange sense of comfort in relationships that echo those dynamics.
Intensity vs. Stability
When your emotional baseline was set in chaos, peace can feel uncomfortable. If you're wired to anticipate rejection or emotional withdrawal, then a stable partner who doesn't trigger those fears might not feel like love at all. Instead, you'll gravitate towards intensity and hence mistaking unpredictability for passion and anxiety for desire.
Think of it as emotional adrenaline. Just as adrenaline makes a rollercoaster exhilarating, emotional volatility makes relationships feel vivid. But a rollercoaster is thrilling precisely because it's not safe. The same applies here.
Attachment and Attraction
Attachment theory tells us about anxious, avoidant, and secure patterns. But there's a more subtle, complicated style: disorganized attachment. People with disorganized attachment desperately want closeness but also deeply fear it. They crave intimacy yet sabotage it once they have it. The result is constant push-and-pull dynamics, confusion, and emotional exhaustion.
John Bowlby (1988) described attachment styles as rooted in our earliest interactions, shaping our expectations for future relationships. People with disorganized attachment patterns often experienced inconsistent or frightening caregiving, leading to confusion about intimacy and trust. Consequently, they seek closeness but feel threatened when it becomes real, triggering behaviors that push partners away (Main & Solomon, 1990).
Many Dating Disturbed stories echo this exact pattern: excitement rapidly turning into chaos, affection replaced by defensiveness, and love overshadowed by fear.
Real-Life Examples
In Masks and Mirrors, affection quickly became performance. In The Cutest Aggression, playful teasing turned controlling. The story Gone to the Dogs captures the subtle confusion between care and control, where emotional overwhelm was masked as affection and support. These aren't isolated cases, rather illustrations of the same emotional paradox: attraction to chaos perceived as connection.
Breaking the Pattern
Recognizing the difference between healthy connection and emotional activation takes practice. Start by paying attention to your body:
Does this person make you feel grounded or perpetually anxious?
Are you constantly guessing their feelings or intentions?
Is the excitement about them based on reality or fantasy?
True intimacy isn't chaotic. It might feel unfamiliar at first, even uncomfortable. But calm is not the absence of chemistry. It's the presence of genuine emotional safety. That’s the difference between love that feels good temporarily and love that’s good for you in the long run.
The fire might seem beautiful, but the flame that lasts isn't fueled by chaos but rather sustained by trust, clarity, and emotional health.
References
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Clinical applications of attachment theory. Routledge.
Fisher, H. E., Aron, A., & Brown, L. L. (2005). Romantic love: An fMRI study of a neural mechanism for mate choice. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 493(1), 58-62.
Levine, A., & Heller, R. (2010). Attached: The New Science of Adult Attachment and How It Can Help You Find—and Keep—Love. TarcherPerigee.
Main, M., & Solomon, J. (1990). Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti, & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research, and intervention (pp. 121-160). University of Chicago Press.
