Is that not a tad hypocritical?
For something to be hypocritical then it would have to be applied differently in the same situation. But it is
NOT the same situation.
People who are targeted by oppression are not in the same situation as the ones
enabling it. "
I was just following orders" is not an excuse, even if it's a shitty position for them to be in as well (though not remotely as shitty).
I'm not saying it's an easy call for her or many other people complicit in any number of oppressions, but that doesn't mean she -isn't- complicit. Nor does it mean that the marginalized group aren't the ones hurt by her calculated inaction while she only benefits. There is no such thing as oppressor classes just "
keeping their heads down" in the same way in which the oppressed try to minimize that oppression's impact on them.
Hm. I'll say something not-intended-to-be-analogous-(and isn't), more-so to get the power differential across. Say the two of us are hanging out together while I'm visiting you over in England or something, and one of your friends makes a transmisogynistic 'joke' because I'm there. Would you say it'd be hypocritical to consider you more responsible for dealing with that than me - as failing to do so would be a tacit endorsement of his behaviour (and you're the link between me and the main-asshole)? Or perhaps that my shying away from dealing with said transmisogynist for self-care is not equivalent to your not wanting things to be awkward with that friend?
(The additional power imbalance at play in the situation at hand is, however, also that she's economically marginalized relative to the boss, but people with all kinds of marginalizations uphold all kinds of oppressions all the time. And one does not cancel out the other. 'Understandable' is not the same as 'Not complicit'.)