The term ‘weaponised incompetence’ has recently gained widespread popularity across several social media platforms despite its 2007 Wall Street Journal origins. Jared Sandberg first described the concept as one in which employees intentionally demonstrate a lack of competence in the workplace to avoid performing unwanted responsibilities. It has more recently evolved to encompass several forms of passive-aggressive behaviour and manipulation techniques where an individual acts deliberately incapable or performs tasks poorly. The recent surge in popularity of the phrase can be attributed to the expansion of social media which has allowed for the amplification of previously marginalised voices. Contemporary discourse on this topic highlights the societal construction of gender roles and the archetype of women as inherent domestic contributors, tasked with managing the residual responsibilities of their male counterpart. This manifests in forms of unpaid domestic labour including cooking, cleaning, housework, childcare, and adult care. It is commonly defined as non-work and has a dangerous tendency to normalise unrealistic and outdated expectations of women within relationships. From a theoretical perspective, weaponised incompetence by men may be conceptualised as a mechanism perpetuating the subjugation and commodification of women, treating them as a devalued resource.

“Women’s labour becomes like a natural resource, available to all, no less

than the air we breathe or water we drink.”
Rosemary-Claire Collard

Weaponised incompetence can take such subtle forms within relationships, often leaving frustration and resentment in its wake. The inherent ambiguity of the concept often results in it being overlooked, causing tensions that can subsequently intensify. The normalisation of weaponised incompetence and the constant undervaluing of the significance of such behaviour poses a risk to societal progress, as it perpetuates a cycle of unrecognized labour and emotional strain, further entrenching gender disparities. Despite historically established gender roles, social commentary on weaponised incompetence has always existed within pop culture and the music scene. Fiona Apple’s ‘Paper Bag’ shows how hope can lead to disappointment, drawing stark parallels to the longing for maturity, yet settling for the suboptimal because of the status quo.

He said "It's all in your head,"

And I said, "So's everything" but he didn't get it

I thought he was a man but he was just a little boy

Fiona Apple – Paper Bag Lyrics | Genius Lyrics

Similarly, the essence of Lana Del Ray’s ‘Norman Fucking Rockwell’ can be distilled to a critique of gender dynamics, summarising the idea that gender is a central factor in the discourse on behavioural expectations and societal allowances.  

'Cause you’re just a man,

It’s just what you do

Lana Del Rey – Norman fucking Rockwell Lyrics | Genius Lyrics

This is not to suggest that men are the only perpetrators of weaponised incompetence. It goes both ways and occurs not exclusively within domestic environments. Several social settings including the workplace, households, local communities and platonic circles provide the required hierarchical structures for weaponised incompetence to take place. Typically, it occurs between one proactive and one idle person through subtle forms of strategic ‘lack of effort’. Examples might include the deliberate poor execution of tasks to prompt intervention by others, selective memory or professing ignorance as an excuse to avoid contribution. These behaviours may stem from genuine unawareness, causing tensions about how engaged in the relationship they may be, or they might be calculated, falling under the catergory of manipulation which is a lot more sinister and detrimental to the relationship.

Often, such patterns begin with the little things. A scene from the 2006 romantic comedy ‘The Break-Up' highlights the subtleties of such interactions. She asks him to buy twelve lemons for a centre-piece she is making; he only buys three. Clearly, he was not listening. She nags him about it. The nagging only increases his disinterest. The argument spirals until it is not really about lemons anymore.

“Fine, I’ll help you do the damn dishes.”
“That’s not what I want. I want you to want to do the dishes.”
“Why would I want to do dishes?”

~The Break-Up , 2006 

If you have found yourself or your close ones  involved in similar conversations, then you probably understand the underlying message—the power struggle of wanting your partner to be involved without constantly having to ask. The repeated request for assistance or engagement damages the equal partnership a healthy relationship should be. Weaponised incompetence turns acts of service for loved ones into a chore. Whether it is intentional or not, it is time to stop being ignorant to the effects of idleness in relationships. Weaponised incompetence exacerbates outdated stereotypes and emotionally drains people around us. Relying on the excuse of incapability to shirk responsibilities signals a lack of willingness of effort. It is not something that should not be normalized within a relationship, and both men and women deserve a relationship replete with genuine mutual effort.