a) i obviously didn't think that, it was very clear you were complaining about them being horny. i was saying that being dominated by male characters is at LEAST as important when discussing whether something is misogynistic or not as how horny it is. i am aware that they are horny, i mentioned the designs as shorthand for that. also when going "it's more than just the character designs!" you said "have you looked at baiken???" which is an example of... character design. but allow me to rephrase: there is more to misogyny than being horny
b) "Even her fucking character portrait is a mild upskirt."

this is a normal outfit. i see people wearing skirts like that all the time. you can see a hint of what looks to me like a pair of modesty shorts underneath, but i am only just now learning this because you have to REALLY zoom in, which i never did because why on earth would i? even if i were to concede that the art is horny (which i really don't, this is such a normal outfit. i wear skirts that short sometimes!) that does not equal objectification, which is when women are reduced to sex objects. bridget is not being reduced to a sex object here, she is a character with agency in the story and a good, resonant character arc

this is in contrast to what i was discussing in point c, which was the most important point. she USED to be exactly as objectified as you said, with her existing solely so the game could be horny about her and set up transmisogynistic punchlines.
compare. in strive she is a person, in her og appearance she was just a sex object. there is a difference between a woman in a kinda skimpy outfit and a woman who is being objectified