I have been giving it some thought, really, about the differences between Lust and Love. I suppose I should start by defining what I mean by the two terms regardless of their official definitions and if anyone wishes to correct the words or definitions then they can do so.

I define the word "Love" as having a somewhat spiritual, emotional, mental and perhaps metaphysical bond with another soul, or being. In this case, I mean it towards an intimate relation rather than a friendly or family type "Love".
By "Lust" I mean the want and desires associated with sexual intercourse and anything with that nature. Just for the gratification, and for the physical pleasures and perhaps release of stresses moreover than the actual connection it offers to the counterpart involved.

Getting to the point, the idea I wanted to discuss is that I believe there to be a distinction between people when looking through people. I have witnessed and am aware myself of the male tendency to divide females between those who would only be good enough for the Lust (sex), compared with those that could offer Love as the emotional and relieving bond and relationship.

Of course, I would believe that women would do the same thing their side when judging the men. There would be a distinction between which men would be only good enough for Lust and which for Love.

How does this then work for homosexuals? Believably the same, but associated with the same sex. If Gay they would look through the men and divide between lust and love. And if lesbian then the same with the women.

Is it therefore possible to divide orientation between Love and Lust?

Therefore, being open for Lust with either sex, male or female, but only being orientated for one through love. It would bring a whole new dimension to the table. I believe there is a distinction between the two. It is possible and perhaps somewhat common, for person to only be interested in one sex for Love and relationships but be open sexually and lustfully for the more than one.

For example, A man that is open to other men, and women for sex or anything of that nature. But, does not develop a connection with men in terms of love, that which he does have with women. It is simply Lust and nothing more.

This then brings forward, are the terms Gay, Straight, Lesbian..Etc to generalized? Do they include more than they should? If we think of someone who is Gay we attribute them to only being interested in the same sex. But what do we mean by "interested"? Sexually? Emotionally? I believe that it should be more closely defined.

For example, "I am straight (meaning in terms of Love) and Femaphilic" suggesting they are oriented to the opposite sex for a relationship but orient themselves for Lust towards females.
Likewise, suggesting "I am Gay (again in terms of Love) and Mascaphilic" would imply they are attracted to the same sex for a relationship but orient themselves for Lust towards males.
Yes, I am aware Femaphilic amd Mascaphilic are not real words I made them to demonstrate the point. Of course, if you were interesting in both sexually then you could be perhaps Biphilic, or using a prefix that would suggest both.

What I would like to know from people willing to discuss this point is, what do you think of this idea? Do you agree or disagree and why? If your going to state your point, back it up and explain it.