A step up in complexity from a category of sets we can look at the category of graphs.
Objects in Grf are a collection of vertices and edges related in certain ways. However category theory tends not to look inside objects.  
Morphisms in Grf sends vertices to vertices and edges to edges, such that, if a>b is an arrow Again category theory tends not to look inside these morphisms. 

Relating category theoretic view to set theory view.There is a representable object in Grf (see Yoneda lemma page). This might help us relate the internal and external views of Grf. This representable object is a graph with two vertices and an arrow between them. Arrows into this object can be thought of as picking out all the edges in the other object. This gives a homset with an arrow for each edge. 

Given a morphism 'F' between two graph objects. If both these objects have hom functors to the representable object then there is a function 'f' between these two sets. This function goes in the opposite direction. 
It is easier to see this contravarience from this diagram. If 'F' is given we can derive 'h' from 'g' by composing with 'F' but we can't derive 'g' from 'h'. So if we want to get the usual functions in set we need to start with Grf^{op} 
Grf^{op}
Objects in Grf^{op} are the same as the objects in Grf.  
Morphisms in Grf^{op} go in the opposite direction to the morphisms in Grf. So this time: if F a> F b is an arrow 
In Grf these functions can be surjective or injective as with set.  surjective function 
injective function 

In Grf^{op} these arrows can be the reverse of these.


So this embedding is given by:
h_{X} = hom_{C}(_,X) : Grf ^{op}> Set
Internal View
Although category theory does not tend to look inside objects it is helpful to relate this to a more set theoretical approach.
The objects in Grf consist of a set together with some internal structure.
Directed Graph 
Two functions, source and target) from the set of edges to the set of vertices. 

An example of a functor category. 
These maps between the source and target imply functors of the verticies and edges. So what does it mean for the arrows to respect the graph structure? For instance, if we look inside the functions, the diagram on the right is valid. 

If we look at parts of this arrow we see: edges map to edges 

Where the vertex function is surjective edges may be reduced to a loop.  
Both the vertex function and the edge function may be injective. 
Functors Between Graphs
Lets look at the possible diagrams for graphs.
External diagram  Internal mapping for a specific example  

category diagram:  
simpler diagram which we can use in the case of endomaps: 
An endomap is a mapping from a object to itself. A category diagram for this case is shown in the higher row in the table above, we can see that it is an endomap because both the domain and the codomain are labled 'A', and hence are the same.
However, because this is an endomap, we can simplify the diagram by showing 'A' as one object.
Graph Categories
So lets start with Grf, a category of graphs, these have a bit more structure than sets and so will allow us to explore the relationships between objects which are sets+structure. I find it helpful to adapt the diagrams as bit, to get us started, so that we can include some of the normally hidden structure beneath. This is just to get us started, we won't always do this as the nature of category theory is to abstract as much as possible. Lets start with sets, which are perhaps the simplest objects, because they don't have the structure of operations like multiplications and additions.
Sets may just be any set of elements, or some or all of these sets may themselves be sets (and these inner sets may also contain sets and so on). Also these elements may all have a common type or not. So we could show the structure inside the set instead of representing them as single characters.  
In the case of structures like groups with a group operation then we could show that, perhaps by combining with a Cayley graph. 
Arrows
I find that including this further information helps even more with arrows:
Here I have showed individual arrows going from each element of the two objects rather than the more usual single arrow between the two objects.  
In the case of groups we may be able to give an indication of how the group operation is changed by the arrow. 
We will call the object at the start of the arrow the 'domain' and the object at the end of the arrow the 'codomain'
Subcategories of Grf
Two important subcategories are idempotent and invertible endomaps:
Idempotent Endomap All arrows lead to fixed points. 

Invertible Endomap (permutation). contains only 2cycles and fixed points 
Grf^{op}
The dual of graph is a category with the same objects as Grf but with the arrows reversed.
normal functionThe blue arrows are intended to show inside an arrow between two grf objects. Multiple vertices can be compressed down to a single point (surjective), for example, 'a' and 'b' both map to 'w'. Some vertices in the codomain don't have incoming arrows, for example, 'y' and 'z'. 

reversed functionWhen the arrows are reversed it is possible for a vertex, for example, 'w' to be mapped to multiple vertices 'a' and 'b'. 
That defines Grf^{op} but it would be better if the revered arrow behaved like a function, that is, if we could change the structure of the objects instead of the arrows (as we did for sets on page here).
Is this possible?
Irriflexive Graphs
Endomaps (mappings from an object to itself) are related to two parallel maps between different objects.
External diagram  Internal mapping for a specific example  

Irriflexive Graph:  
related endomap: 
The endomap is given by the difference between the red and blue mappings.
Adjunctions in Graphs
Adjunctions in Graphs
Adjunctions are described on page here.
Between reflexive graph and set. In reflexive graph: every node has loop to itself. 
Between irreflexive graph and set. In irreflexive graph: every node does not have loop to itself. 
Between dynamical system graph and set. In dynamical system graph: every node has one outgoing arrow. 
Different dynamical system graph and set. This time the morphism to set defines the fixpoints. 
Exponential Objects in Graph
There is a homset that shows all the ways an object can be mapped into another object:  
This is related to the Cartesian product by Currying:  Hom(A×B,C)Hom(A,C^{B}) 
The related product might look like this: 
See page here about Cartesian Closed Category structures in graphs.
Monoid
If we overlay multiple graphs (shown in different colours) then we get a Cayley graph as discussed on this page. This gives us a way to move onto monoids and groups in terms of category theory on this page.
Next
See page here about Cartesian Closed Category structures in graphs.