It's interesting how you read this story as an indictment of feminism, whereas I read it as an indictment of Nice Guyism. (I don't think either of us is necessarily wrong. Well, actually I think you're wrong. ;) But I think both interpretations are valid.)
You're right that I see it as an indictment of feminism, but I also totally agree with you that the story is an indictment of Nice Guyism. It's just that I view Nice Guyism as a symptom of "listening to / trusting women about what they say they like", which shares a nontrivial connection with feminism as a value and as a movement. I don't know if I've ever seen this equivalency explicitly defended before, but it's pointed to by eg Scott's Radicalizing the Romanceless.
You're right that the guy's coworkers tried to redpill him in his late 20s, and I actually really enjoyed that scene because it displays where (to me) the incel community goes wrong. Rather than looking at the red pill and saying, "The rules of the game are different than what I was told, so let me start playing by the actual rules," their reaction is "We were told the rules were fair, but they actually aren't, so let's get mad about the unfairness." There is absolutely zero productive way to channel this. Good luck trying to change the rules without sounding like a misogynist or worse, right? So the only direction to go is compounded frustration and outrage, against the system and everyone who participates in it. Hence inceldom.
In an alternate universe where young men were taught from an early age to respect women but also the realities of how to be attractive as a man, I think incels wouldn't be a problem like they are today, and (dare I suggest) day-to-day interactions between the sexes would be much happier. In fact, I know for certain: this alternate universe is called "the past." Some eventual synthesis of the feminism/manosphere dialectic will inevitably result in a regression to the mean, but I fear that it'll get worse before it gets better.
Cheers for the friendly reply!