2

What may be a less morbid equivalent of the idiom "Giving someone enough rope to hang himself"?

In other words, an idiom for empowering someone with a capability that they might, through ignorance, misuse to self-detrimental effect.

The motivation for an alternative is the professional setting, where it's not appropriate to allude to suicide!

  • 1
    If you're worried about alluding to suicide in your professional environment, you might also want to avoid taking this action in the first place. It's generally poor team play to enable a teammate in this way. – Ian MacDonald Dec 4 '18 at 19:29
  • 1
    Not regarded as morbid. Just a figure of speech. Cherish the English language for its colour, rather than strangling it with bland weasel words. – David Dec 4 '18 at 19:55
  • 2
    @David On what basis can you say it's not regarded as morbid? Using death by hanging as a metaphor for an unrelated situation very much suits the definition of the term. To want to avoid allusions to death by hanging in a formal business setting does not seem at all in opposition to "cherishing the English language's colour", since there are plenty of other colourful expressions which are not appropriate to all audiences. – Paul Hendry Dec 4 '18 at 20:54
  • 1
    @RobbieGoodwin Its allusion to death by hanging (and to suicide depending on how you interpret it) is direct and specific, in contrast to some usages of death/injury imagery in idioms. Contrast against Omar's suggestion of "dig their own grave", which alludes to death in a more abstract sense, or "shoot yourself in the foot" which is a specific description of self-harm but softened by the absurdity of it. "Giving them a gun with which they can shoot themselves in the foot" would be an example of a made-up expression with the same meaning. – Paul Hendry Dec 4 '18 at 20:58
  • 1
    Thanks Paul and broadly, what makes anything "morbid" is not the subject, but why one even looks at it, let alone concentrates on it. We here have no tiny fraction of the time it would take to explain why, yet “Giving someone enough rope to hang himself” is nothing like "using death by hanging as a metaphor for an unrelated situation…" To me, that you see this as morbid, or go on to associate "hanging" with "suicide" says more about your mind-set than any part of the language. – Robbie Goodwin Dec 4 '18 at 21:07
1

More of a phrase than an idiom, but...

set someone up to fail / set someone up for failure

From Wikipedia (I know, I know... but it's the best source I could find):

Setting up to fail is a well-established workplace bullying tactic.[6][7][8] One technique is to overload with work, while denying the victim the authority to handle it and over-interfering;[9] another is the withholding of the information necessary to succeed.[10]

If a person puts another individual (usually a subordinate) in a stressful situation in which failure is almost certain, this may be an aspect of bullying wherein the outcome can then be used to discredit and blame the victim.[11] Sometimes, this may involve the bully covertly sabotaging and undermining an objective that may have otherwise been achievable. This type of bullying may be the result of the projection of the bully's own feelings of inadequacy onto the victim.[12]

There can be cases where an employee is set up to fail because the stated goals of the task are considered harmful to the organization; an internal investigation is one example. Institutions may protect themselves by "going through the motions" of a sham investigation in which the findings conveniently fail to find any evidence of wrongdoing by the authorities involved with setting up the investigation.

From the Harvard Business Review: comic illustrating a boss setting someone up to fail

That was specifically about employees and bosses, but it's possible for parents/children, co-workers, teammates... any number of relationships. Even yourself!

  • I think this comes pretty close, though may not be quite the thing. – Kris Dec 5 '18 at 6:34
  • 1
    I don't think this is too bad, but there is clearly someone downvoting answers to this question in a rather cavalier manner. The comic strip may have annoyed him. – David Dec 5 '18 at 13:02
  • @David Yeah, I didn't realize the comic would be so ill-received. I thought it would be a nice change from the blocks of text we get so often. – miltonaut Dec 10 '18 at 20:13
  • @David so are you saying, with regard to voting, that StackExchange bit off more than it could chew, or gave us enough rope to hang ourselves? ;) – kenny Feb 19 '19 at 18:44
-4

As I have already implied in my comment, I see nothing morbid about “giving someone enoucgh rope to hang themselves”, and I do not think there is an exact equivalent.

However a form of anodyne words to convey the requirements of the poster using an idiomatic expression, might be

To encourage someone to bite off more than he can chew

This differs from a straight idiom-for-idiom equivalence, in that my addition of “to encourage” is needed to cover the act of “giving”, satisfying the poster’s “empowering” (his words, not mine). His reference to “a capacity”, expressed by “enough rope” in the original idiom, implies surplus capacity — a limited amount of rope would be enough, but more is given to allow “misuse to self-detrimental effect” (in the words of the poster). I would suggest that “more than he can chew” embodies the same idea of “surplus capacity” (“capability” in the words of the poster) with the “self-detrimental effect” being merely implied — indigestion? choking? embarassment at having to spit the meat out? — but clearly there.

  • This fails to answer the question. "He bit off more than he could chew" implies that the hapless person didn't just have the ability to do something detrimental, he actually did it. We don't say things like "we had him bite...". Moreover, "bit off more than he could chew" implies that his action landed him with responsibility to do more than he could do. The OP might or might not want that implication. – Rosie F Dec 5 '18 at 6:48
  • @RosieF — I think your comment ignores the context of the request. I have modified my answer to clarify why I think it might serve the poster's needs. Please read it and consider withdrawing your downvote. – David Dec 5 '18 at 8:49
  • 1
    You know, if you disagree with the premise of an OP it's perfectly acceptable to say so in an answer but to then add the following gratuitous comment (unless the act of chewing is considered vulgar with its association with gum). is just being unnecessarily sarcastic and catty. Now, if it had been witty that would be a separate matter. – Mari-Lou A Dec 5 '18 at 11:30
  • @Mari-LouA — Sigh. Deleted. (But surely the English usage of the word "catty" is only in relation to women.) – David Dec 5 '18 at 13:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.