and it’s very common for the usage to cause conflict, the exchange of “are you threatening me?” “no, i’m just telling you what I’ll do” is very common.

i personally wouldn’t use it as a shorthand when there’s no violence or punitory damage implied, unless I purposefully wanted to escalate things. it’s a word that refers to violence, so it will harsh the vibes instantly

a key element of coercion (and this is deeply studied in law so there is less subjectivity than regular language) is that the hypothetical presented cause a damage, and then the avoidance of that damage is traded for a positive action. it doesn’t really apply to a case where a person exercises their right (to leave) and it only secondarily (or not at all) causes a damage, there is no intent to harm and no manipulation of the other into acting one way to avoid that harm.

in the context of leaving a relationship, it might make some sense only if there’s a contract, or even some sense of loyalty that is expected from an extracontractual custom, we are talking marriages or (arguably) employment or religious affiliation, where bonds and codependence are formed. but invoking that treatment for strangers on an as-is warrantyless usage contract? nah