"Are Lust And Attraction The Same Thing?"
This is an interesting question and was one that I thought of, when deciding whether to continue observing romance poetry or not.
A very easy answer is "no." I can be attracted to almost anything without being sexually attracted to it. I really like Super Mario and can be attracted to videos about the video game series, but that doean't mean I lust after the video game series. In fact, I prefer that series because it's one of the least sexual video game series amoung popular and large ones.
When trying to reduce my sexuality or lust, I noticed that I tended to act sexual after observing romance poetry. Yet for a long time, I did not want to stop observing romance poetry because I thought that it promoted attraction as opposed to lust.
But I've noticed some parellels between romance poetry and lust. Even the most classic poems had some seeming sexual references. Know that I consider kissing on the lips as sexual, yet even marriage (where I live) is sealed with a kiss on the lips.
So then I tried to be attracted to women without respect to their bodies. Maybe I could be attracted to a woman's wisdom? Or maybe I could be attracted to a woman's empathy?
There were a few issues with these new types of attractions. Firstly, both men and women can be very wise; so I could theoretically trick myself into being attracted to a very wise man. Such attraction may make me even more stereotypical towards women. I already assume that all women have sizable chests and hips, which isn't always the case for every woman. Then imagine adding personality steretypes: if I want to be attracted to a woman's empathy, I'd have to add a stereotype that only women can have a great amount of empathy, where such stereotype would help me avoid being attracted by a really empathetic man. Yet the reality is that some men can be really empathetic.
Secondly, even if I transformed or taught myself to be attracted to a woman's empathy instead of her body without my becoming homosexual, I think I live in a society that encourages sexual attraction. The society might be promoting sexual attraction so that men would be likely to have sex with women. For example, if I was attracted to a woman's empathy, then I probably wouldn't have an urge to have sex with her. I'd probably get enough relief just from observing her empathy or through empathetic communication. Heck, I might get relieved by watching a video of nurses caring for patients in a hospital. I think my society wants men to have sex with women for the production of children, so my society encourages or supports sexual attraction or an attraction towards women's sexual body parts. So even if I didn't want to be sexually attracted to women, I would be living in a society that would be constantly promoting sexual attraction. Even some women thought that I was awkward for not being attracted to their bodies. Where I live, sexual attraction may be cultural. Some people are assumed homosexual, if they don't show signs of sexual attraction; which is an unfair assumption but I've learned to live with it.
So no, lust and attraction doesn't have to be the same thing. It depends on the individual. Even the bible mentions that not all men need to marry and have sex, and that marriage is a solution for some men who have uncontrollable lust. So there are people who don't have lust but may have an attraction.
I say you can be friends with anybody you want as long as they have a good set of morals.
I agree: this is very important. You may find it difficult to be friends (and nothing more) with someone who is sexually attractive, but such friendship becomes more difficult when that someone sexually tempts you or commonly sexually communicates with you. I am very careful when making friends with women because it's near impossible to discern if a woman is a prostitute or not. Prostitutes avoid self-identifying because prostitution is illegal where I live.