Putting a face to Calliope Wong

After a single-query google search, and skimming a few links, a new picture of Calliope Wong formed in my mind. When it comes to trans*, pictures are important. In fact, they’re increasingly important, now that the term “transwoman” has been thoroughly coopted by men - eg Jennifer McCreath, Michelle O’Toole, Alexis Star etc.

When you read a sympathetic news article about “a young woman denied entry to a women’s college”, you tend to picture a young woman in your mind. As in, female. (At least, I do.) But Calliope is clearly, unambiguously male. It’s hard to believe that based on her appearance, anyone would classify her as a young woman.
Why does this even matter? Am I just being “looks-ist”? It matters because gender is a socially-assigned characteristic. Calliope is obviously a male, and is going to immediately, obviously stand out in an all-female environment.
Would things be any different if Calliope passed? A little, but not very much. If Calliope looked female, her presence would certainly be less disruptive. On the other hand, the point of female-only schools is to counter the effects of socialization under patriarchy. Female socialization is something that Calliope, who is obviously male, could not possibly have experienced.