Yes it would've been more contentious.
This way the students were basically lead through the nose to a certain conclusion, because of Kathleen stock's moderate viewpoints.
In an ideal world, the outcome would be the same, even if a more pro women basis made it happen. Women's spaces ring fenced. End of.
The reason for students thinking that might be advisable though, would not necessarily be because they have grasped that women are being used by a male supremacist movement. It would be because, reluctant though they are to agree, they do understand that the loopholes can be exploited by bad faith actors.
I do wonder, sometimes, why the concept of AGP never enters their heads. I mean, they do mix with men, right?
Stock did raise it, by pointing out that the umbrella for what constitutes a transwoman is so wide, it includes cross dressers. (It actually includes anyone of course.)
i'm assuming they still haven't analysed what cross-dressing actually requires - in terms of its use of women, both as a concept, and as a presence.
I'd like to be a fly on the wall when they raise the possibility of her being right to the rabid mob who were outside.