This entire thing was so dull and surface level it hurts.

The first section was almost entirely dedicated to the topic of respectability politics, or the old duality of "gays can't do x, because straights will think bad of them" and "gays can do x, because straights do it too", not to the way the oversexualization cited affects the gay community and the lives of actual gay men. No! It's all about the straights!

The second section was an anecdote fest: "I don't suffer any kind of discrimination in my life, so pride isn't necessary anymore" against "there are people who do, so pride is still necessary". Also, another point of discussion was the presence of sexuality at pride, which was again, nothing beyond circular back-and-foward.

The "I would date a transmen" part was even worse: the ones who claimed they would do it did everything they could to not touch on the subject of actual sex and intimacy with a trans partner: "well you'll see, sex and intimacy isn't only about interacting with the actual body of your partner, and I don't want to close myself to the possibility of finding that one unicorn FtM^tm who I might fall for".

The funniest part was the "sex isn't about sucking things or penetrating things, I'm totally not being evasive here making shit up in order to avoid touching in the vagina question".

Yeah, sex and intimacy is about rubbing their very male brains together until they climax! That's how it works!

Do they even realize this same argument could be done about women? Hell, homophobic asshats vomit shit like this all the time!

This was the argument of 2 out of the 3 who stayed in the circle, the last one simply vomited "trans experience this", "trans experience that" and avoided the actual question being discussed like a plague.

You know what this sounds to me? "I have zero interest in dating a FtM, but I have to pretend to in order to belong on my social circle and avoid acusations of transphobia".