It definitely gets quite complex when we bring in different power dynamics. This is where I really appreciate the concept of "intersectionality", where multiple identities and situations can influence one another.
I think "poly under duress" inherently means that one or both people are not wanting polyamory, but are doing so because of some other factor.
In an ideal relationship (to me), each conflict gets resolved with both people feeling heard, valued, and like the resolution addresses their concerns. What you bring up a lot in your post are ultimatums, which I would argue do have a coercion element to them. From what I've read, most counselors strongly advise against doing them, as they often also just don't really work and can quickly lead to resentment or a communication breakdown.
From what I’ve read, the key to ethical transition to polyamory is:
- Telling your partner about your interest before you act on your desires
- Being open to hearing their concerns, and being willing to have conversations about what this will mean for your relationship.
- Educating yourself on polyamory, preferably together
- If polyamory is a necessity for you, openly voicing that and discussing ways to respectfully separate if your partner isn’t open to the transition.
- If it isn’t, being open to other potential solutions for your needs
Of course, most poly transitions likely don’t hit all of these, but I believe it’s valuable to have it as a guiding point, and to show what can improve,
I also want to acknowledge, “Mono under duress” is also a thing. Poly people can and have been the ones to stay in a relationship contract they’re unhappy with. At the end of the day, it’s all about if each person feels like they have agency in the relationship, and the ability to leave if they don’t.
I'm wary of applying population-scale concepts like intersectionality to individuals.
I think *some other factor* hides a lot. What does it mean that they don't want polyamory? Does it mean they prefer monogamy?
Okay, let's take it apart. So--
A) I'd prefer that my partner not have other partners, but nevertheless, I've decided that I will be in relationship with them even if they do that.
Is that poly under duress?
B) I'd prefer my partner to have children with me, but nevertheless, I've decided that I will be in a relationship with them even if they've had a vasectomy.
Is that monogamy under duress?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it's unimportant. Both of the above are very serious, and can indeed make for a tragic story, especially if otherwise the people involved are strongly drawn to each other. But there's no victimizing, and that's why I don't like the term when it's used outside of an actual DV situation.
Moving on-- sure, I agree that attention, generosity, honesty, flexibility, compassion, etc., are important. But when it comes to practice, not every incompatibility has an easy compromise. The two above examples are good examples of that, too. There's some space, but it's usually just a sacrifice on one part, or a serious change, not simply finding a solution, and no amount of hearing and valuing is going to change that (although it'd be beneficial in a multitude of other ways).
As for ultimatums, I don't really agree in practice. But let me explain first: I agree ultimatums are a nuclear option. They should never be the first step. You need to explain what you want, why and how, and talk about it. Maybe there's a solution or compassion/empathy from your partner. An ultimatum just skips all this.
But in the end, an ultimatum is just a nastily-named hard boundary. So I skipped all the above in my post and went straight to the situation where talking and compromise failed to find a solution. What then? Either a sacrifice or a breakup. Is that an ultimatum, or incompatibility? I don't know. I'd say it's simply a reality of incompatible desires and personalities, whatever you call them, while we put aside how were they communicated. (And we agree phrasing it as an ultimatum from the get-go is not good, not practical, and a bad sign in itself.)
So, practice: reading your list, absolutely. The *receiving* partner has a monumental task, so an explanation and time are needed. IMO, most important is the explanation of the poly person's emotional structure, plus time to experience it in practice, so the mono side sees it at work and can experience their emotions in that context. (In practice, that means seeing, say, conversation between partner and meta that's visibly close and emotional, and experiencing that the consequences of that that are contrary to what the jealousy-based fears are saying.)
The list you made is basically that so there isn't much disagreement here. To reiterate, I just cut that part when I was writing "polyamory or bust" above. That's the reality (it wasn't mean as a literally-spoken question) of a failed attempt to transform into happy mono-poly, or even just poly.
I've heard most mono into poly are at least hard, and don't work, though it's not my personal experience (one mono into mono-poly and one mono-poly into just poly).
Let me ask a question at the end: can you give some practical examples of both poly and mono under duress? Specifically relating to your last paragraph.
