I find it interesting that while from how they describe things, I probably write "girl code" but in my mind, so do most engineer types - it's more pragmatic to write code that "looks right." It makes it easier to read, easier for others to read, and you spend less time trying to figure things out when you revisit the code months, or even years, later.
So, the crux of the article: "Things that aren't just functional, but easy to read, elegantly maintainable, easier--and more joyful--to use, and sometimes flat-out sexy." (Note this can be extended beyond code.) While I think there's definite beauty to physical objects where form follows function, I'm not sure if I agree that it applies to code . . .