Features
Canadian Associates of Ben Gurion University hold online gala event featuring Shira Haas of “Shtisel” and “Unorthodox” fame
By BERNIE BELLAN Shira Haas may be only 26 years old, but she has already become one of Israel’s best known actors, having starred as an Orthodox Jew in both “Shtisel” and “Unorthodox”. (In real life Shira is not Orthodox, by the way.)
On Wednesday, July 7th, Canadian Associates of Ben Gurion University presented a cross-Canada online event promoting brain research at Ben Gurion University, during which Senator Linda Frum, who was in Toronto, took a leaf from her late mother, Barbara Frum’s playbook, and interviewed Shira Haas, who was in Tel Aviv, in what turned out to be an enjoyable and quite interesting 40 minutes back and forth.
In introducing the event, CABGU National CEO Mark Mendelson said that the event had raised a total of $850,000 toward brain research at BGU.
Mendelson also noted that last year’s “Support our Students” campaign had also raised $1.4 million starting in the spring of 2020 – when Covid was taking an especially heavy toll in Israel. The funds raised were used to allow students at the university to remain in school rather than having to drop out due to financial constraints brought about by Covid.
“Canadian Associates of Ben Gurion University” is “the number one Israel based organization in Canada,” Mendelson said.
Proceeds from the gala event will “fund research into neuro-degenerative disease,” Mendelson explained, including Epilepsy, ALS, Alzheimer’s,
Parkinson’s, Dementia, and Stroke. Prior to Senator Frum’s interview of Haas, some 1500 audience members were given an overview of the advances various researchers at BGU have been making in the treatment of different disorders associated with the brain.
Five different researchers at BGU offered explanations of new developments in which they have been involved in each of those areas. In commenting on the challenges they face, BGU President Daniel Chamovitz quoted David Ben Gurion himself, who once said: “If an expert says it’s impossible, find another expert.”
Chamovitz, who was born in Pennsylvania and obtained his undergraduate degree from Columbia before transferring to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he obtained his Ph.D. in plant science, offered the audience some very personal reflections about the toll Covid had taken on both him and his wife.
Chamovitz noted that he had his own experience dealing with Covid, when both he and his wife, Shira, came down with Covid last September. (Chamovitz has been keeping a very interesting online journal tracking Covid at BGU, called “My Covid Year”.) He said that he’s still dealing with the effects of Covid many months later, noting that “Post Covid Syndrome” affects about 10-15% of individuals – mostly women, who have come down with Covid.
Later, however, during the portion of the evening in which Shira Haas was being interviewed, Chamovitz, who displayed a wry sense of humour whenever he appeared during the event, made a funny observation about his Hebrew-speaking ability.
It turns out that Haas’s next starring role will be as a young Golda Meir in a movie about Golda’s life, to be produced by none other than Barba Streisand, called “Lioness”. Haas was asked how she will master Golda’s American-accented Hebrew. (Golda Meir, although born in Russia, moved to Milwaukee as a young woman, which is where she learned to speak English.)
Haas said it was really just a matter of mastering an accent, to which Chamovitz added that he can readily identify with Golda Meir, whom Israelis often made fun of for her American English manner of speaking Hebrew.
In accepting the position of President of BGU, Chamovitz said, he was proud to become head of a university that has been at the forefront of so many advances within Israeli society, including its inclusion of many members of the Bedouin minority who live near Beer Sheva.
Ben Gurion University is now home to the first female Bedouin professor in Israel, he noted: Sarab Abu-Rabia-Queder, who was also the first Bedouin woman to receive a Ph.D.
When it comes to innovation, Chamovitz observed, “All the nations in the Middle East are looking to us (in Israel) for answers. We’ve been living in the desert” – no university more so than BGU.
Turning to Senator Linda Frum’s question and answer session with Shira Haas, while Frum was seated in some sort of studio, Haas was in a room in her home, which looked quite unadorned – hardly what you would expect to see in the home of a major television star. Following are excerpts from the interview:
Frum: “What’s it like to be an Israeli celebrity?”
Haas: “It’s a feeling of being a family in Israel. Everyone knows everyone. When you walk in the streets and get compliments it’s like people feel they know you.”
Frum: “How did you know you were going to be an actor?”
Haas: “I was very shy. I never thought I’d be an actor. Thanks to Facebook I auditioned for a part just before I turned 16. One of my first auditions was for ‘Shtisel’ (in which she played the part of Ruchamie). It’s hard to believe that was already 10 years ago.”
Frum: “Did you think you’d have a career only in Hebrew or did you want to be an international actor?”
Haas: “When we were doing ‘Shtisel’ or ‘Unorthodox’ nobody ever thought it would get to Netflix – so I never thought I would become an international actor.”
Frum: “When you choose your projects, you don’t take the easy road. Of all the difficult things you’ve done, what was the hardest?”
Haas: “Your question reminded me that a few weeks ago someone stopped me on the street and complimented me. I gave him a big smile and he said: ‘Omigod, it’s so nice to see you smile!’” (in reference to Haas’s roles in “Shtisel” and “Unorthodox” where she faced unremittingly difficult choices and hardly ever smiled.)
“My most challenging role was in ‘Asia’ (pronounced A-seea – in which Haas plays a young girl struggling with a degenerative neurological disease. It hasn’t reached Winnipeg yet.) It was very personal for me.” (Haas had kidney cancer when she was 2, and saw her growth stunted as a result of her chemotherapy treatments, according to a story we ran in our June 23 issue.)
Frum: “You are obviously secular. How did you prepare yourself for ‘Shtisel’ and ‘Unorthdox’?”
Haas: “I was very young when I started doing ‘Shtisel’. I didn’t know much about the Orthodox world. It didn’t occur to me that it’s an Orthodox story. It’s a story about people. It brings people together.”
Frum: “It’s popular because it’s unusual, but also because it humanizes a group about which we don’t know very much. Did it change the dialogue in Israel?”
Haas: “It opened people’s minds – the power of watching art. People all over were suddenly interested.”
Frum: “Did you learn Yiddish for ‘Unorthodox’?”
Haas: “I found out that the Yiddish I needed to learn was completely different from the Yiddish I learned for ‘Shtisel’. Two of my favourite words from ‘Shtisel’ were a ‘bissel’ (meaning “a little”) and ‘koach’ (pronounced “coy-ach” – meaning “strength”).
“I know there are a lot of curse words in Yiddish, but I played Orthodox characters, so I didn’t learn any Yiddish curse words.”
Frum: ‘You’re on a list of the ten hottest Israeli women. (Haas blushed.) How are you going to play Golda Meir?”
Haas: “When she was a young lady she had lovers. I’m going to tell her story. I’m not going to imitate her.”
Frum: “Golda had an American accent. How are you going to pick it up?”
Haas: “Her Hebrew was good, but not as good as her English or Yiddish. She learned Hebrew in her 20s.”
Question from Daniel Chamovitz: “Without Covid, would you be where you are today” (referring to the fact that ‘Unorthodox’ first debuted on Netflix on March 26, 2020 – just as so much of the world was going into lockdown mode)?
Haas: “The first time I knew it (‘Unorthodox’) was a big success was when I was in quarantine and I looked out my window and saw my face on so many screens. I wish circumstances were different.”
Chamovitz: “Covid opened up markets for smaller scale TV shows. Shira, I read that you said you might have been a psychologist. Is that something you’d still consider doing? We have a great psychology program at Ben Gurion University.”
Haas: “Yes, I know. My sister studied psychology at Ben Gurion for her first degree.”
Frum began reading questions sent in by audience members. The first one was: “Time Magazine named you one of the 100 most influential people in the world. How do you feel about that?”
Haas: “It’s amazing. Here I am in Tel Aviv in my pajamas. It’s hard to think of me as one of the 100 most influential people in the world!”
Question: “Are you very active on social media?”
Haas: “Not much. I have an Instagram account, but to me it is something that doesn’t come naturally.”
Chamovitz: “You said that as a child you were shy. Maybe that explains it (her not being active on social media).”
Frum: “I wonder about that – you’re being private and interior, and forcing yourself to expose yourself A lot of times actors let their acting speak for themselves rather than talking.”
Frum: “Why do you feel it’s important to do events such as these? We’re in a moment when it’s not so easy.”
Haas: “I am Jewish, I am Israeli. Even if I play Mary Magdalene, I’m still Shira. I’m very proud Ben Gurion University is where my sister studied, and where my best friend is now studying.”
Frum: “Do you feel pressure to be a voice for Israel?“
Haas: “I don’t have to be political to do what I do.”
Frum: “Are you close with the ‘Shtisel’ family? Will there be a Season 4?”
Haas: “Very close. They will forever by my ‘mishpoche’. (But), it doesn’t feel like there will be a fourth season.”
At that point, various representatives of CABGU came on screen to thank Shira Haas and Linda Frum. And, even though it was the middle of the night in Israel, Shira said she had enjoyed herself so much she would have liked to continue. (There’s an idea for some other Winnipeg organizations.) It was a truly delightful evening. There’s something to be said for a well-planned online event. Congratulations to the organizers.
Features
Israel Has Always Been Treated Differently
By HENRY SREBRNIK We think of the period between 1948 and 1967 as one where Israel was largely accepted by the international community and world opinion, in large part due to revulsion over the Nazi Holocaust. Whereas the Arabs in the former British Mandate of Palestine were, we are told, largely forgotten.
But that’s actually not true. Israel declared its independence on May 14,1948 and fought for its survival in a war lasting almost a year into 1949. A consequence was the expulsion and/or flight of most of the Arab population. In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, millions of other people across the world were also driven from their homes, and boundaries were redrawn in Europe and Asia that benefited the victorious states, to the detriment of the defeated countries. That is indeed forgotten.
Israel was not admitted to the United Nations until May 11, 1949. Admission was contingent on Israel accepting and fulfilling the obligations of the UN Charter, including elements from previous resolutions like the November 29, 1947 General Assembly Resolution 181, the Partition Plan to create Arab and Jewish states in Palestine. This became a dead letter after Israel’s War of Independence. The victorious Jewish state gained more territory, while an Arab state never emerged. Those parts of Palestine that remained outside Israel ended up with Egypt (Gaza) and Jordan (the Old City of Jerusalem and the West Bank). They were occupied by Israel in 1967, after another defensive war against Arab states.
And even at that, we should recall, UN support for the 1947 partition plan came from a body at that time dominated by Western Europe and Latin American states, along with a Communist bloc temporarily in favour of a Jewish entity, at a time when colonial powers were in charge of much of Asia and Africa. Today, such a plan would have had zero chance of adoption.
After all, on November 10, 1975, the General Assembly, by a vote of 72 in favour, 35 against, with 32 abstentions, passed Resolution 3379, which declared Zionism “a form of racism.” Resolution 3379 officially condemned the national ideology of the Jewish state. Though it was rescinded on December 16, 1991, most of the governments and populations in these countries continue to support that view.
As for the Palestinian Arabs, were they forgotten before 1967? Not at all. The United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 194 on December 11, 1948, stating that “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.” This is the so-called right of return demanded by Israel’s enemies.
As well, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) was established Dec. 8, 1949. UNRWA’s mandate encompasses Palestinians who fled or were expelled during the 1948 war and subsequent conflicts, as well as their descendants, including legally adopted children. More than 5.6 million Palestinians are registered with UNRWA as refugees. It is the only UN agency dealing with a specific group of refugees. The millions of all other displaced peoples from all other wars come under the auspices of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Yet UNRWA has more staff than the UNHRC.
But the difference goes beyond the anomaly of two structures and two bureaucracies. In fact, they have two strikingly different mandates. UNHCR seeks to resettle refugees; UNRWA does not. When, in 1951, John Blanford, UNRWA’s then-director, proposed resettling up to 250,000 refugees in nearby Arab countries, those countries reacted with rage and refused, leading to his departure. The message got through. No UN official since has pushed for resettlement.
Moreover, the UNRWA and UNHCR definitions of a refugee differ markedly. Whereas the UNHCR services only those who’ve actually fled their homelands, the UNRWA definition covers “the descendants of persons who became refugees in 1948,” without any generational limitations.
Israel is the only country that’s the continuous target of three standing UN bodies established and staffed solely for the purpose of advancing the Palestinian cause and bashing Israel — the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People; the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People; and the Division for Palestinian Rights in the UN’s Department of Political Affairs.
Israel is also the only state whose capital city, Jerusalem, with which the Jewish people have been umbilically linked for more than 3,000 years, is not recognized by almost all other countries.
So from its very inception until today, Israel has been treated differently than all other states, even those, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, and Sudan, immersed in brutal civil wars from their very inception. Newscasts, when reporting about the West Bank, use the term Occupied Palestinian Territories, though there are countless such areas elsewhere on the globe.
Even though Israel left Gaza in September 2005 and is no longer in occupation of the strip (leading to its takeover by Hamas, as we know), this has been contested by the UN, which though not declaring Gaza “occupied” under the legal definition, has referred to Gaza under the nomenclature of “Occupied Palestinian Territories.” It seems Israel, no matter what it does, can’t win. For much of the world, it is seen as an “outlaw” state.
Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.
Features
Why New Market Launches Can Influence Investment Strategies
New market launches play a critical role in shaping how investors plan, diversify, and execute their financial strategies. When a company transitions from private ownership to public trading, it creates fresh opportunities for capital participation, valuation discovery, and long-term growth assessment. An upcoming IPO often attracts retail and institutional investors alike, as it offers an opportunity to invest at an early public stage. These launches influence market sentiment, sector momentum, and portfolio allocation decisions, making them an important consideration for anyone seeking to align investment strategies with evolving market dynamics. Understanding how new listings affect pricing, risk, and long-term potential helps investors make more informed, disciplined choices.
Understanding the Role of New Market Launches
New market launches introduce fresh capital, innovation, and competition into public markets. They often signal broader economic trends and provide insights into emerging sectors. For investors, these launches are more than just new tickers—they shape market behavior and strategic planning.
● Expanding Market Opportunities
New listings expand the investable universe by introducing companies that were previously inaccessible. This allows investors to explore new industries, technologies, or business models, helping diversify portfolios and reduce reliance on mature or saturated sectors.
● Price Discovery and Valuation Dynamics
Initial listings go through a price-discovery phase in which demand and supply determine valuation. This process can create short-term volatility but also offers strategic entry points for investors who understand fundamentals and market sentiment.
● Capital Flow Redistribution
When new companies enter the market, capital often shifts from existing stocks to new offerings. This redistribution can influence sector performance and temporarily affect broader indices, thereby altering portfolio allocation strategies.
● Reflection of Economic Confidence
A steady flow of new listings often reflects positive economic sentiment and business confidence. Investors monitor these signals to gauge market health and adjust their equity exposure accordingly.
● Increased Market Liquidity
New launches contribute to overall market liquidity by increasing the number of tradable shares. Increased liquidity improves price efficiency and offers investors more flexibility in executing trades.
How New Listings Shape Investor Decision-Making
Investment strategies are not static; they evolve based on market conditions and available opportunities. New market launches influence how investors assess risk, timing, and portfolio balance.
● Risk Assessment and Appetite
Newly listed companies may carry higher uncertainty due to limited public financial history. Investors must evaluate their risk tolerance and decide whether early exposure aligns with their overall strategy.
● Portfolio Diversification
Including new listings can enhance diversification by adding exposure to different revenue models or growth stages. This helps balance portfolios that may be overly concentrated in established companies.
● Short-Term vs Long-Term Strategies
Some investors seek short-term gains driven by listing momentum, while others focus on long-term value creation. Understanding this distinction helps align new investments with broader financial goals.
● Sector Rotation Strategies
New listings often emerge from high-growth sectors. Investors may rotate capital into these sectors early, anticipating future expansion and innovation-led growth.
● Behavioral Influence on Markets
Public interest and media coverage surrounding new listings can influence investor behavior. Awareness of sentiment-driven movements helps investors avoid emotional decision-making.
Evaluating New Market Launches Effectively
Not all new listings present equal opportunities. A structured evaluation framework helps investors separate strong prospects from speculative risks.
● Business Model Strength
Understanding how a company generates revenue and maintains profitability is a fundamental part of evaluating new market entrants. A well-defined business model shows how products or services create value for customers and how that value is monetized. Scalable models, diversified revenue streams, and predictable income sources often indicate stronger resilience and long-term investment potential, especially in competitive or evolving industries.
● Financial Transparency
Clear and detailed financial disclosures help investors assess a company’s overall health and risk profile. Reviewing revenue growth, operating margins, debt obligations, and cash flow stability provides insight into financial discipline and sustainability. Transparent reporting practices reflect management accountability and reduce uncertainty, enabling investors to make informed decisions based on reliable data rather than speculation.
● Competitive Positioning
A company’s ability to compete effectively within its industry is a key determinant of future performance. Investors analyze market share, differentiation strategies, pricing power, and barriers to entry to understand competitive advantages. Strong positioning suggests the company can defend its market position, withstand competitive pressures, and capitalize on emerging opportunities over time.
● Management and Governance
Leadership quality plays a crucial role in long-term value creation. Experienced executives with a track record of execution, combined with robust corporate governance structures, signal operational credibility. Transparent decision-making, independent oversight, and ethical practices help reduce risk and align management actions with shareholder interests, particularly for newly listed companies.
● Growth Sustainability
While rapid expansion can attract attention, sustainable growth is what supports lasting returns. Investors assess whether realistic assumptions, operational capacity, and consistent market demand support growth projections. Balanced expansion strategies that prioritize profitability, efficiency, and long-term planning are often viewed as more reliable than aggressive growth that strains resources or increases financial risk.
Strategic Timing and Market Conditions
The success of an upcoming IPO is closely linked to strategic timing and prevailing market conditions, which significantly influence investor response and post-listing performance. Market sentiment plays a decisive role, as optimistic, growth-driven environments often generate strong demand for new listings, supporting positive price momentum after debut. In contrast, cautious or volatile markets can suppress enthusiasm, limiting upside potential even for fundamentally strong companies. Alongside sentiment, macroeconomic factors such as interest rate trends, monetary policy direction, and fiscal measures shape capital allocation decisions. Lower interest rates generally encourage investors to seek growth opportunities through IPOs, while tighter policy conditions may dampen risk appetite. Together, timing, sentiment, and policy context form a critical framework for investors to evaluate entry strategies for upcoming IPOs.
Conclusion
New market launches have a meaningful influence on investment strategies by introducing fresh opportunities, shifting capital flows, and shaping market sentiment. From diversification and growth exposure to timing and risk management, these listings require thoughtful evaluation and disciplined execution. By understanding their broader impact and aligning participation with financial goals, investors can integrate new opportunities into well-structured portfolios while maintaining balance and long-term focus.
Features
Are Niche and Unconventional Relationships Monopolizing the Dating World?
The question assumes a battle being waged and lost. It assumes that something fringe has crept into the center and pushed everything else aside. But the dating world has never operated as a single system with uniform rules. People have always sorted themselves according to preference, circumstance, and opportunity. What has changed is the visibility of that sorting and the tools available to execute it.
Online dating generated $10.28 billion globally in 2024. By 2033, projections put that figure at $19.33 billion. A market of that size does not serve one type of person or one type of relationship. It serves demand, and demand has always been fragmented. The apps and platforms we see now simply make that fragmentation visible in ways that provoke commentary.
Relationship Preferences
Niche dating platforms now account for nearly 30 percent of the online dating market, and projections suggest they could hold 42 percent of market share by 2028. This growth reflects how people are sorting themselves into categories that fit their actual lives.
Some want a sugar relationship, others seek partners within specific religious or cultural groups, and still others look for connections based on hobbies or lifestyle choices. The old model of casting a wide net has given way to something more targeted.
A YouGov poll found 55 percent of Americans prefer complete monogamy, while 34 percent describe their ideal relationship as something other than monogamous. About 21 percent of unmarried Americans have tried consensual non-monogamy at some point. These numbers do not suggest a takeover. They suggest a population with varied preferences now has platforms that accommodate those preferences openly rather than forcing everyone into the same structure.
The Numbers Tell a Different Story
Polyamory and consensual non-monogamy receive substantial attention in media coverage and on social platforms. The actual practice rate sits between 4% and 5% of the American population. That figure has remained relatively stable even as public awareness has increased. Being aware of something and participating in it are separate behaviors.
A 2020 YouGov poll reported that 43% of millennials describe their ideal relationship as non-monogamous. Ideals and actions do not always align. People answer surveys about what sounds appealing in theory. They then make decisions based on their specific circumstances, available partners, and emotional capacity. The gap between stated preference and lived reality is substantial.
Where Young People Are Looking
Gen Z accounts for more than 50% of Hinge users. According to a 2025 survey by The Knot, over 50% of engaged couples met through dating apps. These platforms have become primary infrastructure for forming relationships. They are not replacing traditional dating; they are the context in which traditional dating now occurs.
Younger users encounter more relationship styles on these platforms because the platforms allow for it. Someone seeking a conventional monogamous partnership will still find that option readily available. The presence of other options does not eliminate this possibility. It adds to the menu.
Monopoly Implies Exclusion
The framing of the original question suggests that niche relationships might be crowding out mainstream ones. Monopoly means one entity controls a market to the exclusion of competitors. Nothing in the current data supports that characterization.
Mainstream dating apps serve millions of users seeking conventional relationships. These apps have added features to accommodate other preferences, but their core user base remains people looking for monogamous partnerships. The addition of new categories does not subtract from existing ones. Someone filtering for a specific religion or hobby does not prevent another person from using the same platform without those filters.
What Actually Changed
Two things happened. First, apps built segmentation into their business models because segmentation increases user satisfaction. People find what they want faster when they can specify their preferences. Second, social acceptance expanded for certain relationship types that previously operated in private or faced stigma.
Neither of these developments amounts to a monopoly. They amount to market differentiation and cultural acknowledgment. A person seeking a sugar arrangement and a person seeking marriage can both use apps built for their respective purposes. They are not competing for the same resources.
The Perception Problem
Media coverage tends toward novelty. A story about millions of people using apps to find conventional relationships does not generate engagement. A story about unconventional relationship types generates clicks, comments, and shares. This creates a perception gap between how often something is discussed and how often it actually occurs.
The 4% to 5% practicing polyamory receive disproportionate coverage relative to the 55% who prefer complete monogamy. The coverage is not wrong, but it creates an impression of prevalence that exceeds reality.
Where This Leaves Us
Niche relationships are not monopolizing dating. They are becoming more visible and more accommodated by platforms that benefit from serving specific needs. The majority of people seeking relationships still want conventional arrangements, and they still find them through the same channels.
The dating world is larger than it was before. It contains more explicit options. It allows people to state preferences that once required inference or luck. None of this constitutes a takeover. It constitutes an expansion. The space for one type of relationship did not shrink to make room for another. The total space grew.