I don't know if this will help, but even more fundamental than the relativity of simultaneity is the conventionality of simultaneity. That is, there is nothing real to O' saying that a photon hit the left end of his rod and another photon the other end of his rod "at the same time". There is no real "at the same time" for events that happen at different places. There is only a real "at the same time" for events that happen at the same place, which is really just a way of saying that only events, only the intersections of worldlines are real.
This seems especially clear to any musician who's played in an ensemble. We want different notes by different musicians in different locations to be played "at the same time". If the musicians are far apart, and musician A plays a note and musician B plays a note, and they sound "at the same time" for musician A, then the notes cannot be "at the same time" for musician B, because B must have struck his note earlier than musican A, so that although B's note travels a greater distance to A's ear than A's note travels to A's ear, both notes hit A's ear at the same time - but certainly the notes are not "at the same time" for B who struck his note earlier. Thus music ensembles show that "at the same time" is nonsense (at best an approximation) if things occur in different places, and it's only exact for things in the same place.
So when we say two different events happened at the same time for O', that is nothing real - that happens because of a particular clock synchronization *convention* use to define an inertial frame. If two photons hitting the left and right ends of O's rod "at the same time" for O' is not even real for O', then it really is even less sensible to ask that they be real for O.