From the article:
"The social experiment counted more than 100 instances of verbal street harassment..."
In ten hours she received "more than 100 instances of verbal street harassment."
Let's say "more than 100" is 150 (which is grossly high, it's probably 108-120 or they would have said "more than 110" or "more than 125"). At the generous 150, that's 15 per hour, or one every four minutes. Walking at a normal in-city pace, she passed how many thousands of men per hour? In crowded conditions, maybe several thousand per hour.
So we're talking about what fraction of men she encountered that said these things to her? At 1,000 men per hour, that's less than two percent of the men she encounters say such things. It's a negligible percentage at best.
The Daily Show did a similar story a week or two ago, had a pretty "reporter" walk around New York and she got the same thing.
Guys do harass women. It's not OK.
But just like it's not OK to harass women, it's not OK to label Men as harassers. There are men who harass. There are men who don't - and they're the vast, vast majority.
What this "experiment" did was label "men" as harassers. It doesn't specify which men, all men are put in the same bucket.
It also doesn't provide any direction for men on what TO do. "Here's what 'men' do that's wrong, but we're not going to show you what's right." Why? Because there is no right. Like men, women aren't some single-bucket, "we-all-feel-this-way-about-everything" demographic. They're as diverse as leaves in a forest, and there are women who appreciate varying degrees of notice from men. How would anyone, man or woman, know the level of OK-ness a particular woman has about being asked, “How you doing today?”
For real. “How you doing today?” is one of the very few statements ID'd in the article as harassment. You ask a woman you don't know “How you doing today?” and you are harassing her.
This is the kind of conclusion this "experiment" is giving us. Mind-boggling.
Then there's always this: