It is an argument based solely on the fact that the author feels that Sharp reflects negatively upon women in tech, something she makes clear at the very start:

I want to say, as a female developer: Sarah Sharp is not representative of us. She's not representative of the women at Intel. She's not representative of women in technology.

This is greatly dependent on some of the insanity that has occurred on Sharp's personal blog, where she has chosen to do many nonconstructive things like censor or vandalize comments left by others, generally inciting arguments where they weren't intended to be arguments, and a whole lot of other nonsense. I'm assuming you didn't look to see what was there (and after Sharp finished pruning the comments, which included her own where she implied the resistance was based on her gender, I'm sure you won't now).

Is there a stronger argument other than the fact that the conversations that Sharp claims to have been the subject of weren't actually directed at her at all?

Sarah's exclaiming how she won't take any of this abuse, yet no one was directing any of it at her.

That's the truth of the matter, and that's something that Francesca (author) has repeatedly hit. She simply was not involved in most of the situations she blames for her departure.

My commentary implied that you at least read the remainder of the article, and if you weren't planning on it, at least read the quoted section. I don't have a particularly strong opinion about this; Linus takes a hard stance on any and all stupidity involving the Linux kernel and that's why it's as good as it is. He's not going to be "professional" because he takes fundamental issue with the implication of that word:

“The fact is, people need to know what my position on things are. And I can’t just say ‘please don’t do that,’ because people won’t listen. I say ‘On the internet, nobody can hear you being subtle’, and I mean it,” he wrote.

“Calling things ‘professional’ is… trying to enforce some kind of convention on others by trying to claim that it’s the only acceptable way,” he wrote, adding: “I’m sitting in my home office wearing a bathrobe. The same way I’m not going to start wearing ties, I’m also not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what ‘acting professionally’ results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways.”

tl;dr: Sharp quits development because of Tovalds' attitude. Sharp makes a blog post defaming Torvalds. Sharp then starts to censor, delete, or flatout modify comments left for her on her blog (several well thought-out and constructive comments were literally replaced by "fart fart fart".), and there were several comments where she implies the abuse being hurled at her were only due to her gender.

Yes, Torvalds is still a "hero". Maybe that doesn't have anything to do with Sharp directly, but his reasoning for why he is the way he is, that is much more substantial than her reasoning for leaving.