If you heard the statement "manager coerces their employee into sex" things immediately come to mind, either involving withheld promotions or firings, so I don't think that's nearly so cut and dry.

A better definition of coercion is to use power over someone to make them do something you want. Might even be a dictionary definition.

All of the examples could be coercion using this definition, and its clearer how to treat the grey zones:

the punch uses physical power over you; without trying to make you do something it's not coercion though

Advertising might be if they're using tricks to bypass your judgement

Threatening to punch someone is definitely coercion, unless you are stronger than them/they don't have that power

Stealing your wallet definitely is

Firing somebody sometimes is. The big questions are:

- does the company(or manager) have power of the individual? Eg. Can the employee easily replace the company; do they even need a job? Are they on a work visa? - is the company trying to make them do something?

> I think it should mostly include things that physically alter or arrest man's body or property.

Ah, yes, this makes significantly more sense.

> Maybe I mean "violate natural rights" rather than "coerce".

Well, "coerce" obviously has a "or threaten to do so" and a "in order to cause or prevent certain behaviour" tacked onto it's definition, but "violate natural rights" otherwise seems like a plausible definition in and of itself; the question that immediately follows being what qualifies as a natural right. Absence of unprovoked physical violence certainly sounds like it would be included in that, but short of contrived and circular definitions of "violence" and "physical", it isn't really sufficient.