If you haven’t gotten a text back after this long, you probably won’t get one

Last night, while sweating bullets, panic-eating Hot Cheetos and then sweating more bullets, I found myself three Google pages deep in articles about the benefits of texting back. And I almost convinced myself. Almost. Just before reality came flying out of nowhere and smacked me upside the goddamned head.

This particular reality triggered by a survey conducted by Hinge, in which they studied users as a means of finding out if there are, in fact, proven benefits to double-texting. And interestingly, they found that there are. You know, if you’re a push-over.

The survey revealed that the g-spot when it comes to hitting “send” on that second text comes 4 minutes after sending the first one.

After that, the blue double-text line just kind of keels over, like a boner right after she says “So you like teeth, right?”

But, what’s infinitely more interesting about this chart is the pink line — the “single text” line. Look at it drop from a 55 percent chance (which is weak to begin with) at a text back, to a 38 percent chance in just half an hour.

If he’s hasn’t texted back within thirty minutes, put your phone away

You’re probably not going to hear from him. And if you do, it’ll be half-assed.

To be honest though, I don’t think we should be that surprised. We are, because we want to be, but in 2017 do you really believe that if he hasn’t answered a text in three hours it’s because he’s “busy” with something else??

If someone says “work” is the reason they can’t look at their phone, they’re lying — nobody works a nine-hour day without looking at their phone. I don’t care if you’re in a meeting with the CEO, I bet you’re glancing at the screen anyway.

It’s time to put to rest the idea that someone is excusably “busy” when they’re not texting back. When they text you, you get all smiley and literally cannot wait to respond, so if they’re not texting you back within thirty minutes to an hour, they’re not as into you.

@carolinephinney