Knecht cites a number of dangers that women may encounter which she describes as a larger context that make 'women catcalling men' different in some sense from 'men catcalling women'. Basically, this context changes the meaning of the 'women catcalling men' situation and makes it not equivalent to 'men catcalling women'.

But...

- Knecht claims catcalling implies disrespect. (We can debate this later; it's not an obviously true claim.) Disrespect shouldn't be condoned, regardless of context; disrespect means disrepect, just like no means no. The implied assumption seems to be that 'women catcalling men' is OK as revenge; but revenge begets revenge, and the cycle never ends.

- Women may well be in more danger than men, but that does not give them a 'revenge right' to disrespect men, especially men who (as far as the article says) hadn't done anything disrespectful to them. Compare this with reactions inside certain racial contexts. Some statistics seem to show that Blacks are more likely to commit (certain) crimes than Whites. One might argue that Whites are in more danger of being attacked by Blacks than vice-versa. There may be some sense in which this implies that a Black being attacked by a White is 'not equivalent' to a White being attacked by a Black; but it certainly is not in the sense of considering an attack by a White 'less offensive' or 'less deserving of punishment'.

The fact that one is justifiably angry at the context (in which women do face a certain risk of violence, or in which Whites and Blacks also fare differently) doesn't mean that one should condone 'revenge'. The only way to change the context is with true equality, in which men and women have the same rights -- including the right not to be disparaged or disrespected by e.g. catcalling. Women disrespecting men is not really a way to improve women's rights or women's safety from disrespect.

This, of course, if one assumes that catcalling is inherently disrespectful. Judging by some of the letters here, this is far from a consensus opinion.