How long should a first date be?

May 30, 2013 12:40 PM

I know this question can have really varying answers, but I'm wondering if I should be doing something to curtail the length of first dates (and I guess second and third, just the early few) slightly. Right now I'm finding they run about three hours and I'm wondering if I should be keeping them shorter and lighter.

My goal is to have longer relationships and I'm trying to figure out what's going on - I usually have a very comfortable, chatty first date that runs about three hours, maybe a second or third that's similar, and then (I'm a straight woman), the person usually doesn't ask for another date and I'm usually OK with that. This hasn't exactly devastated me always, but I'd like to learn how to work on getting things going a bit longer.

I'm wondering if I'm burning things out and ruining the "mystery" by having early dates go on too long, or getting into too many topics.

I know this can also be a case of "not meeting the right person yet" but I'd still like some perspective on how to manage/time the first date and if an average of three hours is running too long. It's not that I'm timing them at three hours, it's just that that's how long they tend to go, and sometimes people have commented that they are "too long" so I'm interested in working on that. I enjoy talking to new people and am good at keeping the conversation going, but I'm having a lot of trouble getting the momentum going into starting a real relationship.

These are usually just drinks and snacks dates, sometimes dinner. Also not looking for alternative date ideas or anything like that.

posted by zutalors! to Human Relations (18 answers total)

Response by poster: Just to clarify, when I say people have commented that they are "too long" I mean friends I have discussed this with, it's not feedback from people I've gone on dates with.
posted by zutalors! at 12:46 PM on May 30, 2013

Anecdata: I've been on first dates that lasted from under an hour to others that lasted for 12+ hours and both types went on develop into relationships, so in my experience, no, there is no optimal time limit on first dates.

In fact, if someone figures after additional exposure to you that they're just not that into you, that's good to find out early on instead of spreading it over extra additional weeks/months.
posted by Jacqueline at 12:46 PM on May 30, 2013 [6 favorites]

This doesn't sound particularly long to me. I guess my question would be if you are kissing or getting physically affectionate (even something like holding hands or an arm around a shoulder) on the first or second date. I can imagine if a man has two pleasant, chatty dates with a woman but there is zero physical interaction he might assume she isn't interested and stop asking her out.

I'm also wondering if "the person doesn't ask for a third date" means that you are always waiting for the man to ask you out again, or if you have explicitly proposed a third date and been explicitly rejected? It may be that he assumes the "ball is in your court" so to speak.
posted by telegraph at 1:01 PM on May 30, 2013 [4 favorites]

In my experience, this is above average length for dates that don't include dinner, but the person you should be dating won't be able to get enough of you, so it's a non-issue.
posted by sarahnicolesays at 1:04 PM on May 30, 2013 [3 favorites]

I always think that if the first meeting is a blind date or a dating site connection that an hour or so at Starbucks is about right. You can see if you're appealing to each other, chit chat a bit, and then, if you're both willing, make a dinner date.

The dinner date should be about 3 hours. Talking through dinner, really getting to know someone. My sister has a thing about dinner dates. "If I start to wish I was home watching Walker, Texas Ranger, it's not a connection."

Your third date should be a fun activity. Going to a show or museum or street fair. You should now be laughing and giggling.

Frankly, I'm not sure why you'd get to date three if dates 1 or 2 weren't all that great. If you are getting to date 3, where does it derail? Do you run out of conversation? Does the guy just start getting on your nerves? Are you talking between dates, and getting more intimate?

Either way, dating sucks. Hang in there.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 1:06 PM on May 30, 2013 [3 favorites]

It depends on the activity and if things are going well. Three hours talking? Even if it was equally apportioned that is extreme unless you found you were soulmates. Movie and a dinner could easily be 3 hours but that would be a big commitment for a first date. For a jogging date that would be a lot of running. A coffee date that lasted 3 hours would probably be too much latte.

At most a lunch date of an hour is enough time to know if there will be date #2 and won't be overwhelming. Never exchange life stories on a first date. Have enough contact and face time to be able to digest overnight what your date is really like. There really is something to be said for "speed dating".
posted by JJ86 at 1:26 PM on May 30, 2013

Just a side note on date banter and conversation. Dates aren't interviews trying to compare life stories. Finding a partner is about discovering romance. You can have a romantic evening without saying a word or you can say some sweet nothings. Regardless, the point is to start building some romance out of those dates, not talking about your job or day or family, etc. If a date is derailed by nothing romantic, then it is easy to see where the problem is.
posted by JJ86 at 1:34 PM on May 30, 2013 [2 favorites]

I think it's less a matter of a time limit and more a matter of structuring the date so that either of you has a polite way to duck out after a short period - so, a movie isn't a great idea, and going on a hike is a terrible idea, but if you dine somewhere, afterwards you can go for a walk, and if that goes well, you can have some dessert, and if THAT goes well, more dessert.

Short discrete activities which have a beginning a middle and an end.
posted by Teakettle at 1:40 PM on May 30, 2013 [2 favorites]

I once had a first date that lasted two whole days. YMMV.
posted by infini at 1:44 PM on May 30, 2013 [4 favorites]

Nine hours is a good, solid length of time to get to know someone well enough to know if you want to continue dating them. However, it is also a good, solid length of time to get feedback from the other person that they want to continue dating you.

Rather than worrying about the dates being too long, I'd instead look at whether your physical intimacy and/or comfort around each other increases over the three dates, and if not, explore whether you're facilitating that increase or accidentally thwarting it.
posted by davejay at 1:48 PM on May 30, 2013 [3 favorites]

Response by poster: In fact, if someone figures after additional exposure to you that they're just not that into you, that's good to find out early on instead of spreading it over extra additional weeks/months.

This wasn't really what I meant - I don't mean, should I space out my dates into shorter segments so that it takes men longer to realize they don't like me?

I mean is a shorter date more appealing and intriguing to people (leaving them wanting to know more, etc) so thanks for the several responses that did address that.


Frankly, I'm not sure why you'd get to date three if dates 1 or 2 weren't all that great. If you are getting to date 3, where does it derail?

Because I've been told to give the men more time to grow on me.

Are you talking between dates, and getting more intimate?

Not for the most part (definitely not much talking between dates), and I do think this is part of why the dates fizzle. As for the man reaching out on the third-ish date, it's not that I think the man must initiate, but if they don't and I'm also ambivalent, I usually move on because I don't see the point of wasting their time if I'm ambivalent. But this has really become a pattern at this point and I feel like there might be something about my approach that could change.


the point is to start building some romance out of those dates

It's embarrassing to admit this, but I don't really know what this means if it's not talking about my interests and life (including work/family, but the positive fun parts of those not woe).

Thanks for the responses on why three hours might be too long. They're very interesting. I don't try to make them so long, I just am not that good at wrapping it up and still seeming interested in seeing the person again.

Sorry for long follow up, just wanted to answer a few things!
posted by zutalors! at 3:14 PM on May 30, 2013

I just am not that good at wrapping it up and still seeming interested in seeing the person again.

Have something scheduled for after your first date. You have to get back to work after lunch, meet a friend later, go to a meeting, but you'd love to continue the conversation. Arrange second date later on.

Don't spring this on them at the last minute.

Three hours is a long conversation for many people to have with someone they have just met, or met only briefly before.
posted by yohko at 4:22 PM on May 30, 2013

I have a good friend who did quite a bit of online dating, and she developed the method of always, always meeting for coffee first to chat. At, like, 11 AM. So both people could assess whether there was interest in a longer date and not waste each other's time. I thought this was a very good idea. You can still give people the 2nd and 3rd chance of additional dates if you're not sure, but you can also just hop right out of unproductive matches.

Keep it brief and light.
posted by Miko at 5:10 PM on May 30, 2013

In my experience:

A first date lasts an hour or less: it means one of us isn't interested.
A first date lasts 2 to 3 hours: it means we had a good time.
A first date lasts 4 hours or more: it means we had a great time!

I'm not saying longer dates are always better. I'm saying, if you're on a date and you're enjoying yourself, why on earth would it be wise to rush it? To maintain a sense of mystery? That's a game. Don't play games. If you are having a good time on a date, enjoy yourself.

People who come up with systems for how dating works are usually either scheming, foolish, or both. The only rule for a first date is this: Don't do anything you're not comfortable doing. If you're not comfortable going back to his place on a first date, don't. If you're not comfortable sleeping with someone on a first date, don't. But if you're enjoying yourself, the idea that it's better to cut it short is just plain wrong.

One of the most amazing first dates I ever had lasted 8 hours and marked the beginning of a marvelous relationship.

That being said... sometimes dating works best with a bit of planning. If I have a first date with someone I like, but it seemed a little awkward - maybe she wasn't much of a talker - I'll suggest an activity for a second date. Board games at a pub! A photo walk around town! Hell, even roller skating can be great silly fun.

Everybody likes fun. If you find ways to make dating fun, you increase your odds of having fun, which makes you fun to be with. And like I said, everybody likes fun.

One more thing: Avoid dating traps.
Movies? No! You end up sitting there, staring at a screen instead of connecting. That's a trap.
Dinner? No! Too much time is spent eating, which makes conversation awkward. That's a trap.
Meet up with friends? No! It's awkward for everyone, and it opens the door to your date and your friend hooking up.
posted by 2oh1 at 5:24 PM on May 30, 2013 [7 favorites]

I should also add that I've gone on dates with women who had a 'rule' about keeping first dates brief. I can't think of a single time I asked one of those women on a second date. Why bother? There's nothing I hate more on a first date than being treated like a number. If I'm on a date with a woman who keeps it brief because that's what she does with every guy... pass.
posted by 2oh1 at 5:39 PM on May 30, 2013 [3 favorites]

i'm with 2oh1 on this, specifically in their second post. People who create(or subscribe) to artificial rules of how they want dating to work are a bit tiresome. If you're doing something, and it's working for you(by which i mean not running in to horrible awkward/terse endings) then don't let other peoples weird contrived rules stop you.

Like jacqueline, i've had first dates last 20 minutes or 12 hours. My friends have all had similar experiences.

Because I've been told to give the men more time to grow on me.

This also stinks of crap to me. Anyone i've ended up dating i knew at most after the second time that we've hung out that something was there. If it works, it works. if you've lost interest bail.

There shouldn't be some arbitrary "gave them enough of a chance" goalpost. I've gone on plenty of dates/to activities/events with people once and realized i couldn't give a crap. I regret the times in the past i forced myself to "give them a chance to grow". Don't doubt your feelings, and once again don't let your friend dictate some script you should be sticking too.

I'm also wondering if you aren't talking between dates because of some advice from your friends not too. Texting/chatting online between dates is a pretty standard thing to do now and doesn't "ruin" anything. In fact, my current girlfriend credits us chatting online between our first few dates as when we really started to grow on eachother.

Do whatever you feel like doing, and don't tie yourself down with a bunch of dating "rules". That kind of stuff is mostly for people who by default overshare, attach or try to move too quickly, etc and you don't sound like one of those people.

So yea, in conclusion, keep doing what you're doing and don't worry about length or avoiding contact to play some silly game. I really don't think you're doing anything wrong other than following the weird "rules of the game" people have laid out for you as some kind of script.
posted by emptythought at 6:29 PM on May 30, 2013 [3 favorites]

Eh, I'm in the "you haven't met the right person yet" camp. My first date with my now-husband was about 7-8 hours, though it was intended to be just lunch. Date two was about 8 hours, and he called me the next day to hang out some more. Date three was two days, and after that we had such a good rapport that we talked often even when he was traveling for work or I left town. When it feels like nothing is ever enough, in a good way, like everything is better with the other person, when the other is the first person you think to turn to in good times and bad, you've struck gold! Hang in there, eventually you'll meet someone and the time will just fly.
posted by OompaLoompa at 10:21 PM on May 30, 2013 [3 favorites]

And for additional context, I am as blunt as a baseball bat when it comes to getting to know you questions and I want to see you again statements, all of our first few dates were over / Started out as meals, etc. So magic formulas about mystery and what's acceptable first meeting activity or not really depends on whether or not you like each other and gel. Don't think too hard about it. The right one will like you for who you are, without dating strategery.
posted by OompaLoompa at 10:33 PM on May 30, 2013 [3 favorites]