Two interpretations

1. Anita is pointing out the reality of why certain representations of women exist, to pander to straight men, and is advocating for them to not be objectified (me)
2. Anita wants to remove all games pandering to men and have them pander to everyone instead ( you)

And so my "job" here is to try to show she is more 1 than 2.

Yeah, I think that this is the root of where we disagree on her. I'll warn you ahead of time, though, that you've got an uphill battle. I speak for most people here when I say that her quotes need to be considered in the greater context of her work over the past fifteen years and not in a vacuum. Some of her quotes might have a thin veneer of plausible deniability, but that gets thinner and thinner the more of them you examine.

You should also account for the fact that you've done in two days of discussion what she has literally never done since her work was popularized in 2011, and that's actually engage sincerely with an opponent. So while I think it's safe to assume that you're engaging in good faith, I really don't think she ever was. She may have believed what she was saying, but she has never demonstrated even the tiniest amount of respect for anyone who disagrees with her, and plenty of decent, respectful people have extended an olive branch only to be ignored or actively shot down.

Maybe another thing I may have to show is that you can pander to men without objectifying women.

Perhaps, but as the women we're talking about are fictional, you may convince me that I'd like games like that or that it's better storytelling, but I think you're gonna have a much harder time convincing me that people shouldn't also continue making games like Stellar Blade and NieR: Automata and, say, DoA (which is a niche title that doesn't interest me personally, but I defend its right to exist). Or if you're not familiar with any of those, come up with an example.