The question of human phenotypes playing a significant role in today’s social bias and relationship governance is not disputable. However, human mate selection is unique with a myriad of factors coming on board to govern relationships, as opposed to mere observable characteristics.
Mate selection refers to one’s ability to relate inner feelings (hopes and fears) to another person’s and to accept that intimacy is a compromise that leans on biological (genetic) and sociological and moralistic factors. In addition to traits deemed attractive, marriages are products of either social status or advancement; the two main standards that define identity (Muraco, 2008). Family background characteristics such as parental education, marital status and race greatly impact the formation relationships among young adults. Adolescents with educated parents are more likely to have a college education, delayed investment in romantic relationships, and so to marriage commitments or cohabitation due increased likelihood of college attendance. Also influential in the process are issues of parental divorce and remarriages, which may sway children’s relationship formation with consequential effects to marriage and cohabitation patterns in adulthood (Raley, Crisey & Muller, 2007; Holtzman, 2008). Additionally, adolescent variant experiences with the opposite sex as well as union formation patterns in adult mentors may instill some of sense of confidence in determining relationship status. In fact, adolescent relationships are associated to a much more set of characteristics and familiarities that are often carried to adult union formations. Associations (having opposite-gender friends) at this stage tend to render know-hows into likeable attributes such as attractiveness, maturity, religious involvement and academic performance with an additive of self-esteem boost towards closeness (Raley, Crisey &