A Review of: “Hillel Schenker and Ziad Abu-Zayyad. Islamophobia and Anti–Semitism,”

Although foreign fighting is hardly new, scholarly research on the phenomenon is only a decade old. Since 2005, there has also been a dramatic rise in the number of transnational insurgents fighting in the Middle East, and they appear to have become the face of the jihad movement. However, of the dozens of foreign fighter contingents around the world in recent decades, only about half have been Islamists. In this article, I contend that the difference between the other contemporary and historical foreign fighter groups and the jihadis is not one of mobilization or effectiveness, but of persistence. Most other foreign fighters demobilized at the end of their conflicts and reintegrated. I argue that the primary factor that accounts for the persistence of the jihadis was the policies of their home and host states that prevented reintegration and created cohorts of stateless, and now professionalized, actors who perpetuate in weakly-governed conflict zones. In presenting this argument, I first attempt to establish a common working definition of foreign fighter based on the first decade of discourse in this emerging field of study, and present a comparative examination of the largest recorded foreign fighter mobilizations.     

Do Masculine Names Help Female Lawyers Become Judges? Evidence from South Carolina

This paper provides the first empirical test of the Portia Hypothesis:Females with masculine monikers are more successful in legalcareers. Utilizing South Carolina microdata, we look for correlationbetween an individual's advancement to a judgeship and his/hername's masculinity, which we construct from the joint empiricaldistribution of names and gender in the state's entire populationof registered voters. We find robust evidence that nominallymasculine females are favored over other females. Hence, ourresults support the Portia Hypothesis.