This paper provides the first empirical
test of the Portia Hypothesis: females with masculine monikers are more
successful in legal careers. Utilizing South Carolina microdata, we look for
correlation between an individual's advancement to a judgeship and his/her
name's masculinity, which we construct from the joint empirical distribution of
names and gender in the state's entire population of registered voters. We find
robust evidence that nominally masculine females are favored over other
females. Hence, our results support the Portia Hypothesis.