I definitely think that being a cis man with the experiences that entails will make somebody significantly more prone to "debate bro" behavior — that much should be obvious — but it still feels like a bit much to assume that everyone who one would personally label as a "debate bro" is going to be a cis man (with this-like anatomy and this-like sexuality to boot). One's own judgment can always be wrong, and when it is (napr. "oh, that wasn't a debate bro, that was actually just an autistic trans woman"), then you will have run into a "black swan" that you'd rather stay away from, right?

I dunno, "debate bro" is one of those terms that often makes me sarcastically go, "oh, hahah, I get it, GENDER!"... It's like, I get that the term is pointing to a broader trend or phenomenon that is 100% definitely tied to gender among other things, so I don't mind the term "debate bro" being used in an abstract way; but when it starts getting applied to real specific people and unverifiable assumptions start getting made about those people, thennnnn the term feels way too close to comfort to a term that could be used to just shame people for being annoyingly persnickety and argumentative and opinionated and narrow-minded, regardless of the reasons why and regardless of potential biases. And when this is the case, the better terms to use might be, well, "persnickety" and "argumentative" and "opinionated" and "narrow-minded", forgetting any and all unverifiable assumptions about why exactly this seems to be the referent's character.

Honestly, this even goes for ostensibly gender-neutral forms of "debate bro", like "debate perv".