You’ve gotten past the dreaded talking stage, made plans and now finally, it’s here! The first date with someone new! And it’s going well! They’re exciting, they’re amazing, they’re… actually really, really boring and oh my fucking god I need to get out of here.

Yup, we’ve all been there when a date isn’t actually all we hoped it’d crack up to be – but cutting a first date short when things aren’t clicking isn’t always easy. You’ll often consider your date’s feelings above our own and no one wants to come out with some lame excuse about your dog needing a bath.

In an era of all or nothing dating, research from Tinder revealed that singles know within 30 mins whether the spark is there or not – so how do we get out when there’s not even a flicker?

Do we just grin and bear it? Well, as Paul Brunson, Tinder’s global relationship insights expert points out: “While it can feel uncomfortable to cut a date short, prolonging it when you’re not feeling it, might actually be less considerate in the long run.”

So what’s the right way to get out? We asked dating experts for their advice and they’ve come up with a plan so perfect, you’ll never find yourself having to get a friend to phone with an ‘emergency’ again.

When we sent out our questions (see: call for help) to dating experts, the same idea came back time and time again – organise a first date that won’t go on too long, so that you don’t find yourself in an awkward position where you might need to cut it short.

“For first dates where you don’t know the person well, it can be helpful to mention a time constraint as a backup, such as, ‘Thursday sounds great! I do have a deadline on Friday, so don’t keep me out too late!’,” clinical psychologist Dr Sarah Bishop tells us.

Rather than organise a dinner followed by drinks for your first encounter with someone new, opt instead for something low-key.

“Simple dates like meeting for a coffee or drinks are great options,” Sylvia Linzalone, FindingTheOne.com’s relationship guru says.

“And if it’s really going terribly, you won’t have to sit around forever – just drink up and say your goodbyes.”

Time frames are also a fail-safe way to make sure you don’t end up sitting wishing you’d never said yes in the first place – our favourite came from Jamie Johnston, founder of the neurodiverse friendly dating app Mattr, who suggested: “I have an hour free before meeting a friend if you would like to catch up.”

“You have given a clear time frame and also a commitment after which means they won’t try and lengthen the time,” he points out.

And if you’re actually quite enjoying the date? Well, as Dr Melissa Cook at FunWithFeet and Sofia Gray says: “If you do enjoy their company you can always say that you can stay longer.”

OK, OK, don’t panic. It sounds cliché as hell, but it’s true – honesty is in fact the best policy.

We know it’s scary, but you owe it to yourself – AND the other person.

As dating Expert at Pure, Drew Wyllie puts it: “Now, cutting a first date short requires nerves of steel and (if you don’t want to go out with a bang) a good amount of tact and empathy. The thing is, as humans we are often scared of letting people down – especially when it comes to dating and meeting new people.

“In the past within my dating life, I have stayed on the fence about not making my intentions clear and telling people that I’m not sure, and in the end this just makes the situation worse as you can lead the other person on and make them think romance is on the cards when in reality – it’s not.”

When it comes to saying ‘okay that’s enough now’, the main thing is HOW you deliver that honesty.

“If the conversation has dried up, you feel a lack of chemistry or the date simply isn’t going anywhere, it’s okay to acknowledge that. Think about how you’re feeling in the moment and don’t be afraid to share it with your date,” Dr. Lalitaa Suglani, a relationship expert for eharmony advises.

“Being polite doesn’t mean hiding your feelings. If you think it’s time to end a date, don’t make excuses or be overly apologetic. Instead, try a gentle yet straightforward approach. Say something like: ‘I’ve enjoyed getting to know you, but I don’t see this going any further romantically’. This sets a clear boundary without being hurtful, your date will appreciate the honesty and it avoids leaving things in limbo.”

And while we’re on the topic of being polite, letting the other person know that you appreciate their time is also a must according to Dr. Tara (yes, from Celebs Go Dating!).

She also shared the PERFECT framework for a post-date follow-up text for if you’re not in the market for a second date:

“Whether it’s in person or via text, we need to always use empathetic communication – you can do this in three different ways.

1. You can say thank you for your time, but I don’t feel a romantic connection.

2. You can say it has been lovely to meet you but I don’t think we have any chemistry.

3. if you want to remain friends because you like them as a person, but not romantically, then you can say I had so much fun today. I did not feel any chemistry, but if you would like it would be nice if we can remain friends.”

And finally, you don’t need to be polite if the person you’re on a date with is rude as hell – we’re allowed to put our feelings first.

“The situation is a bit different if the date is going poorly because the other person is being inconsiderate—like checking their phone constantly or not being present,” intimacy expert Magda Kay reminds us.

“In that case, I believe you owe it to yourself to speak up. It’s perfectly okay to be direct and say something like, ‘I don’t feel like you’re fully present, and I don’t think either of us is enjoying this. It’s probably best to end it now.’

“Being honest in situations where the other person isn’t showing respect is important, both for giving them feedback and for standing up for yourself. It’s about learning to speak up when you’re not being treated well.”

Consider us told!

They say opposites attract, but a new study says, “Hold on a minute, maybe they don’t.”

Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder analysed research that included millions of couples over more than a century and took into account over 130 traits. They found that, more often than not, we end up with someone similar to them.

“Our findings demonstrate that birds of a feather are indeed more likely to flock together,” said first author Tanya Horwitz, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience and the Institute for Behavioral Genetics (IBG).

According to the study published in the journal Nature Human Behavior, 82% and 89% of traits examined were similar among partners, ranging from political leanings and the age you lost your virginity to nitty gritty physical traits like whether people needed to wear glasses or their waist circumference.

Other areas where couples tended to be similar? Religious attitudes, level of education, how likely a person was to drink or smoke and some measures of IQ all showed particularly high correlations.

“I think that the biggest takeaway is simply that the process of choosing a partner is not necessarily random and that certain traits may play a larger role in partner selection than others,” Jared Balbona, a postdoctoral data scientist and co-author of the study, told HuffPost.

Importantly, though, results can’t tell us exactly why partners might be similar on a given trait, Balbona said.

“For example, it’s possible that people with similar political values are actively seeking one another out, but it’s also possible that partner similarity on political values is due, at least partially, to them living in the same geographic area, as political values tend to congregate within certain regions,” he said.

There were a handful of categories where couples weren’t exactly alike; extroversion, for instance, was one category with little correlation ― meaning an extrovert is just as likely to end up with another extrovert as with an introvert.

“The correlation we found for extraversion was technically statistically significant in the positive direction (.08) but very slight, particularly when compared to a correlation of .58 for political values or .87 for age, where correlations further from 0 are stronger,” Horwitz said.

The research isn’t just enlightening for understanding who we fall in love with; it has important implications for the field of genetic research.

“A lot of the standard models used in our field assume that ‘mating’ is random (i.e., that whether you smoke is completely independent of whether or not your co-parent smokes), but as we demonstrated, there are a lot of traits for which this just isn’t true in sample after sample,” Horwitz said.

For the study, the research team reviewed nearly 200 papers that studied trait similarities among millions of male-female couples, going as far back as 1903.

In addition, they looked at a set of data called the U.K. Biobank to study 133 traits across almost 80,000 opposite-sex pairs in the United Kingdom. (For instance, the data included many rarely studied traits, like whether someone was breastfed or not or played computer games.)

Same-sex couples were not included in the research. The authors are now exploring those separately since patterns may differ significantly.

Of the meta-analysis, Horwitz said there is “no compelling evidence” on any trait that opposites attract. However, in the U.K. Biobank sample, they found a small number of traits in which there seemed to be a negative correlation (albeit small).

Those characteristics included chronotype (whether someone is a “night owl” or a “morning lark”), hearing difficulty, having a twin, and handedness (whether your dominant hand is your right or left).

“I don’t think anybody has ever said, ‘I like them, but I just don’t know if I can see myself with somebody left-handed,’” Balbona joked.

A few aspects of people’s personalities and dispositions were uncorrelated, which surprised Balbona.

“For example, there was little evidence of partner correlations for irritability, nervousness, or being ‘high strung’ — characteristics which potentially could play an important role when deciding whether you want to enter into a relationship with somebody else,” he said.

Epidemiologists may be interested in application for the studies on health and biological indicators, while couples therapists may be most interested in how partner resemblance may relate to relationship satisfaction and duration, Horwitz said.

The researchers said that economists may be interested to see how the findings tie into wealth distribution and the labor market.

“Significant partner similarity on things like income, education, and social status ― regardless of the underlying reason ― can lead to these resources being concentrated within certain groups, thus worsening economic, educational, and health disparities between groups and reinforcing existing social strata,” Balbona said.

Obviously, the solution to this problem is not to stop certain groups of people from being in relationships with one another, Balbona said ― that’s a question he’s semi-frequently asked when he discusses this study.

“Rather, I believe these implications can best be addressed by adopting policy measures that reduce discrimination, increase the accessibility of education/ healthcare to all individuals, and support mixed-income housing, among other things,” he said.

On the individual level, if we’re drawn only to those similar to us, Balbona said, “We can seek out more diverse representations in the media we consume and can actively try to maintain an awareness of our own biases when interacting with others.”