From medieval theologists’ and their attempts at defining God’s love to modern-day studies on the mechanics of contemporary relationships, the concept of affection has continuously shown itself to be of interest to researchers. However, this interest is not merely scientific, as it prevails in culture, music, and social media, as well as day-to-day life. Asking a person to remember, for example, a movie with no romantic subplot may stump them. Thus, developing a personal relationships wellness (PRW) philosophy becomes the scope of this paper and remains essential for the betterment of personal relationships, which should be rooted in realistic expectations (Olson, DeFrain, & Skogrand, 2019). Furthermore, the outlined goals, such as defining love, highlighting some depictions of intimate relationships in pop culture, and searching for potential gender-related undertones, may help further an understanding of healthy relationships. Finally, demonstrating ways for uplifting better practices into life, as per the AWARE post-test results and potential future family life cycle stages, should help maintain personal integrity and growth as essential to personal integrity. Asking different people to define an intimate relationship may yield varying results, with each one having an inherently unique experience. Writers, philosophers, and even psychiatrists have attempted to identify love, comparing it to different concepts in an attempt to make it easier to comprehend (Olson et al., 2019). An article by Hammer and Hammer (2015) defines love as “the result of the process of relationship in which the two people psychologically feel as though they achieve a state of oneness” (p. 10). While this definition pursues unanimity as an ideal of romantic relationships, it does not take into account the possibility of disagreement as a prerequisite for mutual growth. As per my AWARE post-test results, I am a person, who believes that love is an integral base for healthy relationships, as is mutual respect and an ability to communicate. Therefore, my definition of love centers less on unity and more on an ability to negotiate points of consensus while maintaining the same enamored feeling. Relationships are not the result of a single emotion or a mere feeling of closeness. Instead, they may touch upon different cornerstones of human relationships. Robert Sternberg’s Love Triangle, also known as the Triangular theory of love, is a construction that joins intimacy, passion, and commitment in various combinations, resulting in “eight types of love relationships” (Olson et al., 2019, p. 240). While Sternberg’s theory is useful for demonstrating the seven possible pitfalls of a relationship, outlining only one gratifying result, there is no distinction between the feelings of those, who are in love. Any of his eight combinations, from non-love to consummate love, rely on both partners being homogenous in the apperception of their own intimacy, passion, and commitment (Olson et al., 2019). Furthermore, the implemented binary system, where a phenomenon is either nonexistent or maximally domineering, does not seem to reflect the nature of relationships, alternately attempting to outline striking examples. Therefore, agreeing with the Love Tr