...did he have some of other daughters that were married cos he had sons in law. Or were they actually gay husbands of his two daughters that hadnt known a man. I dont quite understand that part, why he mocked them, the sons in law didnt go with him or their wives together. Or were they engaged to be married?
Lot, his wife, the two daughters that went with him = 4
In genesis 19:12 the angels ask him about "sons, sons-in-law or daughters" and he speaks to his sons in law, but not to a son. Sons in law is plural so at least two sons in law, and two corresponding other daughters besides the ones who are at his home - verse 15 the angels say to take the "daughters who are here" indicating they aren't his only daughters.
That makes 8, Lot, his wife, two virgin daughters, two married daughters and their two husbands.
Verse 12 the angels said "sons" plural. The language here specifies sons in law as different than sons, and if we make the presumption that the angels are not ignorant about Lot - which really ought to be the presumption, because when has one of God's angels sent to do God's will been ignorant of His will? These angels know everything about what they are there to do according to the text - so taking that to indicate he has at least two sons, who he does not go speak to, that brings his family total in Sodom & /or Gomorrah to 10
Lot
Lot's wife
2 unmarried daughters
2 married daughters
2 sons in law
2 unmarried sons
Reading the whole context of the account Lot is contradictory to the angels at every single step of the way. He argues with them about where they want to stay when they arrive, he doesn't go warn all his family, he hesitates and has to be forcibly dragged out of the city, he refuses to go to the mountains and wants to go to one of the smaller towns that they were going to destroy.
To me that's a kind of tragic humor though this whole thing - this seemingly completely oblivious and obstinate man Lot, backtalking and dragging his feet while angels are sent by God to rescue him, us later called righteous in 2 Peter 2:27! Because of how he acted? Nope! Because he was vexed by the evil around him ((per Peter)) - not vexed enough to get out of there, tho!
That tells me something about righteousness that's ironically different from how we, who look at the outside, usually think about it