You Saw Every Red Flag… So Why Did You Still Say Yes? The Override Moment Explained

Have you ever met someone, spotted the inconsistencies, the emotional unavailability, the hot-and-cold behavior... and still moved forward? You told yourself "this time will be different," replayed their best moments, and hoped the red flags were just temporary. Then, months later, you're back in the same painful emotional loop, wondering: Why did I override what I clearly saw?

If this sounds familiar, you're not alone—and you're not "bad at relationships." As I explain in my workbook Why Do I Keep Choosing the Wrong Partner?, many insightful, reflective people experience this exact pull. The issue isn't a lack of awareness; it's what happens beneath the surface when your nervous system recognizes something familiar—even if it's distressing.

The Emotional Experience That Keeps Repeating

When people say they're choosing "the wrong partner," they're rarely talking about surface traits like looks or hobbies. It's the feeling: anxious, unsettled, chasing validation, or emotionally charged swings that feel like passion but leave you exhausted.

In the workbook, I prompt readers to reflect: "When I say 'the wrong partner,' I usually mean someone who makes me feel..." Often, answers point to urgency, fixation, or inconsistency—sensations that repeat across partners, even when the people look different.

This repetition signals the pattern isn't about "who" you're choosing—it's what your system is responding to. Romantic choices are often driven by emotional familiarity, not logic or health. That familiarity is wired early: from childhood dynamics where love felt unpredictable, conditional, or intense.

Research in attachment theory supports this. Insecure attachment styles (especially anxious or anxious-avoidant pairings) make people more likely to pursue despite red flags, as the pursuit stems from a deep need for reassurance and fear of abandonment. For anxious individuals, inconsistency can heighten attachment energy, making the relationship feel vitally important—even when it's harmful.

Attraction vs. Familiarity: When "Chemistry" Is Really Activation

One of the most confusing parts of dating is mistaking nervous system activation for true chemistry. Physical attraction is noticing someone; pattern activation is the urgency, anxiety, or fixation that kicks in soon after.

A common scenario: You meet someone charming and slightly unpredictable. Their interest feels exciting; their pull-back leaves you unsettled, replaying texts, seeking signs. This swing gets labeled "passion," but it's often your nervous system on alert—attachment heightened, focus narrowed.

Calm, consistent interest rarely produces the same physiological rush, so it can feel "flat" or uncomfortable at first. Why? Your body learned to associate love with those charged sensations from early experiences.

Psychology echoes this: What we call "chemistry" can be threat-brain activation (similar to stress responses), where cortisol spikes mimic excitement. Trauma or inconsistent caregiving trains the nervous system to equate intensity with connection, leading people to override red flags because the familiarity feels like "home"—even if it's unsafe.

Why Awareness Alone Doesn't Stop the Override

Many reach this understanding and ask: "Okay, I see where it comes from—but why do I still do it?"

Insight doesn't automatically rewire nervous-system patterns. These responses formed through repetition, not logic. You can spot red flags and still feel pulled toward hope ("maybe they'll change") or familiarity.

That's the override moment: When you see the warning signs but proceed anyway—because the emotional pull overrides the rational one. Change requires slowing down: noticing early body signals (racing heart, fixation), pausing for that "one-beat slower" response, and practicing new choices from a regulated place.

Attachment research shows insecure orientations lead to interpreting neutral behaviors as threats or pursuing reassurance excessively, reinforcing the cycle. But patterns can shift with awareness, tolerance for uncertainty ("the in-between"), and gradual trust-building.

Moving Toward Choice, Not Force

The goal isn't eliminating emotion—it's moving through it with clarity. You're here to understand yourself, not "fix" yourself overnight. Build tolerance for calm (which might feel boring at first), shift from hope to grounded information about availability, and respond differently in real time.

If these ideas resonate, my workbook offers guided reflections to map your patterns safely—at your own pace, with nervous system care in mind. It's not therapy, but a tool for self-discovery (and I always encourage professional support if emotions feel overwhelming—text or call 988 in the U.S. for crisis help).

Ready to interrupt the cycle? Explore the Why Do I Keep Choosing the Wrong Partner? workbook and connect at pierrehooten.com or book an initial phone call.

You're capable of steadier, more aligned love. It starts with understanding the override—and choosing differently, one pause at a time.

References:

• Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. (Foundational text on how insecure attachment orientations influence emotion regulation and romantic behaviors; see also their 2019 review in Current Opinion in Psychology on attachment and emotion regulation.)
• Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2017). Adult attachment, stress, and romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.04.006 (PMC4845754) – Discusses how insecure orientations lead to heightened stress responses and pursuit in relationships.
• Simpson, J. A., & Rholes, W. S. (2017). Adult attachment, stress, and romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 19–24. (Related NIH/PMC synthesis on insecure attachment reinforcing cycles despite awareness of issues.)
• Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment: Theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Review of General Psychology, 4(2), 132–154. (Classic overview linking early inconsistent caregiving to adult familiarity-based attraction patterns.)
• Schwartz, R. (via Harvard Medical School publications). The chemistry of love and threat-brain activation. (Explains cortisol/dopamine/adrenaline spikes in early attraction mimicking obsession/intrusive thoughts; see related Harvard Brain article on love neurochemistry.)
• Levine, A., & Heller, R. (2010). Attached: The new science of adult attachment and how it can help you find—and keep—love. TarcherPerigee. (Popular synthesis of attachment research, including anxious pursuit despite red flags in anxious-avoidant dynamics.)
• Olds, J., & Schwartz, R. S. (various works). Cortisol in early love stages and stress responses. (Harvard-affiliated research on how stress hormones like cortisol heighten preoccupation and misattribution of arousal as "chemistry.")