Originally Posted by london
If my partner insisted on meeting my other partners when he knew that is something they don't want, i would think that they have problems respecting boundaries and end the relationship.
In some cases that makes sense to me (casual friends or relationships, long distance relationships, and that does include if the OP considers their relationship such), but I find it much more dysfunctional feeling to be in a relationship that I want to last far into the future, and have a metamour OR friend of a partner that's been around for 17 years and might want to be around for 17 more, avoiding me for the rest of my life. And in this case, it seems like more than not wanting to meet me, it'd also be refusing to go to events, birthday and holiday parties if I might be there so they don't have to meet me, if I moved in with this partner some day, the other party would refuse to come to our shared home unless I'll be out, I'd be unable to come home if the other person is over and my plans out fall through. So yeah - if DADT doesn't work for one party short term, trying to deal with it long term isn't too appealing.
If you start dating somebody who is DADT, it is inappropriate to insist that the other partner meet you, however as her partner had broken up with the other partner and this isn't the case, I don't find it unreasonable to ask "for relationships we start/rekindle from this point on, it's important to me that I have the option to meet them". And yep, that might end a relationship for me, but since I don't see there is any healthy motivation for them not to meet, just fear and jealousy and anger, that would likely be the preferred outcome over being compartmentalized for those reasons. Nevertheless, in this case asking to meet is *not* a boundary pushing behavior because her gf is not dating the ex so there's not DADT agreement in effect, and it's perfectly reasonable IMO to try to sort this out with the gf. *shrug*