I think the TLDR of the original article can be summed by "there is bias even in the interpretation of bias-measuring studies".

The fact that people read this story and conclude "well the only variable at play here is gender, therefore: sexism".

1. This is anecdote. One event. 2. The story-teller is introducing his own bias. 3. The reader has certain preconceptions about gender and bias.

While this is an interesting anecdote, a skeptic should take this whole situation with a grain of salt.