The "controversy" over whether a given system of lift vectoring is weight-shift or not results from imprecise application of Newton's laws. Weight shift vs. aerodynamic control is actually a matter of degree. It is, to borrow a trendy phrase, "non-binary."
We all know that any action triggers a reaction. Picture a gyro with a Bensen-style overhead cyclic control stick. The teeter hinge and tilting spindle are functionally the same mechanism as a swashplate. When the stick is deflected, the pilot does not muscle the whole disk into a tilted orbit. That would take a LOT of muscle. Instead, the tilted spindle and teeter hinge cause a cyclic pitch change. As each blade reaches a certain o'clock position in its orbit, the blade experiences a cyclic pitch change (up or down). The blade then flies higher or lower than its original orbit during the succeeding 90 degrees of rotation. This is what tilts the disk, not the pilot's muscles. The rotor is its own servo (or power steering). But, still...
The pilot applies SOME force to the stick to move it. This force changes the AOA of each blade as the blades cycle around their orbits. The body of the gyro DOES move very slightly in the direction opposite the pilot's push on the stick. But to call this effect "weight shift" would be silly. The frame's direct reaction is microscopic. Essentially all of the control power comes from the rotor tilt. The rotor has used its OWN energy to move ITSELF to the new orbit.
A trike OTOH has the same control bar as an overhead-stick gyro. The direction of movement of the bar to achieve a given pitch or roll is the same as in the O.H. stick gyro. BUT in the trike, a great deal of the tilt of the wing IS created directly by the pilot's muscles. Since the trike pilot typically experiences higher control pressures than the gyro pilot, and since the triker is pushing against the whole wing, not merely rotating a 7" wide rotor blade a couple degrees around its pitch axis, there's more reaction in the airframe. This tilting of the trike cart during control inputs is large enough to be quite noticeable to outside observers.
But modern hang-glider/trike wings aren't pure weight-shift, either. They often incorporate wing-warping mechanisms. This creates an aerodynamic servo effect, reducing control pressures. In effect, these wings have evolved partway toward the rotorcraft approach, in which aerodynamics supplies most of the power to move the lifting surface. So modern trikes use a blended weightshift/aero control setup.
Conventional fixed-wing planes use nearly-pure aerodynamic controls. If, e.g. a FW pilot pushes the yoke forward, he/she uses SOME force, producing SOME reaction pressure against the pilot's seat back, and hence rotates the airframe. Newton's law of action-reaction always applies. But, as with the gyro, this reaction is microscopic and is of no interest. The system actually works by deflecting the elevator down, which (via another aerodynamic servo effect), tilts the entire airplane nose-down and reduces the wing's AOA.
To talk precisely about these things, it would be best to say "this trike has a 40%/60% weightshift/aero control system." A gyro has about a 1/99 system -- nearly all the power to alter the direction of lift comes from aerodynamics, not muscle. Ditto the conventional FW plane.