I think it's should be rather translated as "emphasis bureaucrats and neglecting military personnals".

This trend was set in the imperial court and then propagated to the mores as what there isn't any future making carriers in the military branch.

The reason this trend get set up in the song administration It's partially due to the fear of the military being too powerful as it's the case at the end of the tang dynasty , and also partially due to the thinking that it's easier to control revolt armed with pen than revolt with spear ( i need source on this affirmation because that was i learned blindly during my studies but have no idea about where this come from).

The mores follow then, low or inexistent military wage, recurring purges inside the military, high (actually very very high) army corruption, lack of training, hazardous military manoeuvres, outdated equipment, competent military leaders getting unjustly removed by bureaucrats manoeuvres, all makes that the song military is in a deplorable state almost all the long of their existence.

And so the people get a negative view of the military, especially some to be able to survive used to extort money and goods from the population. And couple with the Confucianism pov of pacifism. It's not hard to imagine how they have so hard time dealing with countries population 100 times lower and getting slaughtered by people they considered down as barbarian. And this false sense of superiority last until the 20th century.

And to answer your question, no, it's not unique characteristics of the song it's also the case for ming and late qing aswell.

Indeed as you explained, song is regard as the dynasty of literature technology and economic development, and as you know, military wise, they are almost useless.

This characteristics last for every major dynasty except yuan, where they last so little that the old fashion still reign after that and as the han population is under almost slavery there arent a decent comparison with the other dynasties.

In ming dynasty, the army reforms lead to a increase of military leader freedom on military manoeuvres, but the army corruption rapidly took down ming's armies capabilities as purges and ill timed reforms tentative followed, the rest is almost a repetition of what song suffered.

For the early qing, because of the eight banner military system, qing army leaders enjoyed much needed freedom of action and they are very capable leaders on their head, however, with time and a very long period of peace, army corruption, loss of combativeness of the leaders enjoying luxury that the south offered, isolationism and again the adaptation to Confucianism culture make the qing army follow the same fate of the other 2 dynasties.

And it's only once the vague idea of nationalism introduced against the European exploitation during the late 19 and 20th century and the establishment of the POC that the problem of emphasis bureaucrats and neglect military get a bit resolved, the establishment of warlord and the military junta of jiang jieshi helped. But because of army corruption ( frenquent subject in chinese military history) and a lots of other factors that is irrelevant here, KMT lost the mainland to ccp.

The ccp almost repeat the same process during the cultural revolution , where a lot of competent military leaders from the sino japanese, civil and korean war get purged, however, at least ccp aknowleged that they did wrong and reinstate some of the competent military leaders before that caused too much damage. But they reformed the army in a way that limit a lot army leaders' freedom of action, so it would be hard to know if china is back to the old vicious cycle of weak army