Features
Individuals like Jonathan Strauss, who stayed in Winnipeg rather than leave when opportunity beckoned elsewhere, are key to sustaining the vibrancy of our community
By BERNIE BELLAN In the September 27 print edition of The Jewish Post & News I wrote an article showing how much inflation has had a very negative effect on the amounts that our Jewish Federation has been allocating to the 12 beneficiary agencies of the Federation.(You can read about those cuts elsewhere on this website.) What I wrote in the print issue is that the fact that the Federation has had to reduce allocations to the agencies this year by over $200,000 brings home a point I have been making for years, which is that the demographics of our Jewish community are changing considerably – and not for the better.
In years past the Federation could count on increased contributions to the Combined Jewish Appeal from one year to the next and the beneficiary agencies could expect to receive at least as much in allocations from the Federation as they had the previous year.
And, although there was a slight increase in the total amount raised by the CJA this past year over the previous year, the amount raised in the 2022-23 campaign was only $50,000 more than what had been raised in the 2021-22 campaign.
As I also noted in my article reporting on the decrease in allocations to agencies in our last issue, the Federation had been able to increase allocations to the agencies in the previous two years only by dipping into its reserve fund to the tune of $100,000 both those years – and that was not sustainable on an ongoing basis.
Yet, the impact of the cuts to agencies will not be nearly as severe as one might have expected for two reasons: As I also noted in my article in the September 13 issue, there was a substantial increase in grants given by the Jewish Foundation this past year. Secondly, many of the beneficiary agencies have established endowment funds that have been yielding returns such that they have been able to mitigate to some extent the impact of the cuts that have now been imposed by the Federation.
Certainly, the financial health of our community institutions is not in immediate jeopardy as a result of decisions that have been made by planners in the past, also thanks to the generosity of donors who have now passed on but who left substantial gifts either directly to the Jewish Foundation or to many of the agencies,, as the case may have been.
But, what of the future? Our Jewish community is an aging community and, while there has been an influx of new blood over the past 30 years, many of the members of the Jewish community who could be counted on to provide financial support for community institutions have disappeared from the scene. In many cases their children are continuing to provide that same level of support – but one wonders whether that will continue very much longer?
Further, there has been an ongoing exodus of Jewish Winnipeggers over the years to other cities – which has only been exacerbated in more recent years by many older – and now retired members of our community, moving to other cities to be closer to their children and grandchildren. While I can’t pin a specific figure as to how many Jewish Winnipeggers fit into the category of ex-Winnipeggers, anecdotally I have been at the receiving end of a constant stream of phone calls or emails over the years from subscribers asking me either to change their address to another city or, as is often the case, simply cancelling the paper when they leave Winnipeg.
That is why it was so refreshing to hear from one young member of our community who chose to stay in Winnipeg when he could easily have made the move to another city when opportunity beckoned.
That individual is Jonathan Strauss, who was the recent guest speaker at the Remis lecture forum, held weekly at the Gwen Secter Centre (and which will be going until the end of October this year).
Jonathan told the audience at the Gwen Secter on Thursday, September 21 how he’s managed to succeed as an entrepreneur in a wide variety of fields, all the while maintaining his residence in Winnipeg, even while servicing clients in many different cities.
His foray into the business word began when Jonathan was only 16, in 1995, he observed – after just having completed Grade 10. He first started working for a publication known as the Computer Post, and when the owners of that publication found themselves in financial difficulty Jonathan had the courage to dare to offer to buy the business from them – which he did.
Still in high school, but now with an entrée into the world of computer retailing through the Computer Post, Jonathan began to organize a computer expo for computer manufacturers and retailers to showcase their products.
Possessed with a formidable communication ability Jonathan was able to transition from organizing annual computer expos to an entire world of event management, under the name Strauss Event Management.
In time, moreover, Jonathan’s networking skills allowed him not only to develop a thriving event management company, but also to begin providing management services for many non-profit associations to the point where his company now provides those services for 13 different associations.
In describing how he came to acquire such a keen ability to network, Jonathan paid particular tribute to Brian Scharfstein, who served as a mentor for Jonathan in the early years of his company. He also mentioned Steve Kroft as someone who has provided great advice over the years.
At the same time Jonathan has been eager to participate in volunteering within the Jewish community, he said, including serving on the boards of Gray Academy and the Asper Campus (were he is the Gray Academy representative on that board). As well, he noted, he has been active in the Rady JCC Sports Dinner for many years.
Jonathan Strauss is not unique in his having decided to remain in Winnipeg, fashion a successful career as an entrepreneur, and play an active role within the Jewish community, but for every Jonathan Strauss I could probably name a great many others who didn’t stay in Winnipeg.
I remarked to Jonathan that several years ago I decided to undertake an analysis of where every single recipient of a scholarship from the Jewish Foundation in a particular year (that I chose at random) had ended up.
I said that what I discovered was that while many of the scholarship recipients who had pursued educations in health related fields, including nursing, dentistry, and medicine, had remained in Winnipeg, the scholarship recipients who chose to enter into business had by and large left Winnipeg.
In response to that observation Jonathan had a very interesting thought. He suggested that, while prior to Covid what I discovered about where young people ended up may have been true for the most part, if I were to undertake a similar study in a few years time, Jonathan predicted that I would discover a great many more young people will have decided to stay in Winnipeg.
The reasons are not difficult to decipher, he suggested: the extraordinarily high cost of housing in cities like Toronto and Vancouver and the incredibly long commute times if your dream is to own a house somewhere that is anywhere close to affordable. Added to that, Jonathan gave his own business as an example of being able to offer services to clients in many different cities that makes no difference where his services are located. (He even gave as an example his having three employees in El Salvador. Jonathan has never met them, he explained, but they’re as much a part of his business as anyone here – to the point that they celebrate birthdays together over the internet as if they were all in the same location.)
I said to Jonathan that, given the negative appeal that living in a city such as Toronto would hold for so many young people, especially those with young families, I’ve often wondered why our Jewish community has never made a more concerted effort to attract families from a city like Toronto.
The reason, I suppose, that our Federation is quite willing to roll out the welcome mat for prospective migrants here from distant lands, but has never made any sort of an effort to attempt to attract Torontonians, for instance, is that Toronto’s own Jewish Federation might find that highly offensive.
And yes, there have been instances of former Jewish Winnipeggers returning to Winnipeg from other cities – and settling in wonderfully here, but wouldn’t it be something if a trickle would turn into a torrent?
The key to the future of our Jewish community here is having more Jonathan Strausses decide to stay here – or perhaps return from cities in which they are now living. The alternative is for our Jewish community institutions to rely increasingly on the past generosity of donors who laid the groundwork for the sustainability of those institutions, but without an ever growing source of new donors to our Federation and its beneficiary agencies, the cut in allocations that occurred this year will very likely turn into a regular pattern.
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.
Features
Matthew Lazar doing his part to help keep Israelis safe in a time of war
By MYRON LOVE It is well known – or at least it should be – that while Israel puts a high value of protecting the lives of its citizens, the Jewish state’s Islamic enemies celebrate death. The single most glaring difference between the opposing sides can be seen in the differing approach to building bomb shelters to protect their populations.
Whereas Hamas and Hezbollah have invested untold billions of dollars over the past 20 years in building underground tunnels to protect their fighters while leaving their “civilian” populations exposed to Israeli bombs, not only has Israel built a highly sophisticated anti-missile system but also the leadership has invested heavily in making sure that most Israelis have access to bomb shelters – wherever they are – in war time.
While Israel’s bomb shelter program is comprehensive, there are still gaps – gaps which Dr. Matthew Lazar is doing his bit to help reduce.
The Winnipeg born-and raised pediatrician -who is most likely best known to readers as a former mohel – is the president of Project Life Initiatives – the Canadian branch of Israel-based Operation Lifeshield whose mission is to provide bomb shelters for threatened Israeli communities.
Lazar actually got in on the ground floor – so to speak. It was a cousin of his, Rabbi Shmuel Bowman, Operation Lifeshield’s executive director, who – in 2006 – founded the organization.
“Shmuel was one of a small group of American olim and Israelis who were visiting the Galilee during the second Lebanon war in 2006 and found themselves under rocket attack – along with thousands of others – with no place to go,” recounts Lazar, who has two daughters living in Israel. “They decided to take action. I was one of the people Shmuel approached to become an Operation Lifeshield volunteer.
Since the founding of Lifeshield, Lazar reports, over 1,000 shelters have been deployed in Israel. The number of new shelter orders since October 7, 2023 is 149.
He further notes that while the largest share of Operation Lifeshield’s funding comes from American donors, there has been good support for the organization across Canada as well.
One of the major donors in Winnipeg is the Christian Zionist organization, Christian Friends of Israel (FOI) Canada which, in September, as part of its second annual “Stand With Israel Support” evening – presented Lazar and Operation Lifeshield with a cheque for $30,000 toward construction of a bomb shelter for the Yasmin kindergarten in the Binyamina Regional Council in Northern Israel.
Lazar reports that to date the total number of shelters donated by Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry (globally) is over 100.
Lazar notes that the head office for Project Life Initiatives is – not surprisingly – in Toronto. “We communicate by telephone, text and Zoom,” he says.
He observes that – as he is still a full time pediatrician – he isn’t able to visit Israel nearly as often as he would like to. He manages to go every couple of years and always makes a point of visiting some of Operation Lifeshield’s projects.
(He adds that his wife, Nola, gets to Israel two or three times a year – not only to visit family, but also in her role as president of Mercaz Canada – the Canadian Conservative movement’s Zionist arm.)
“This is something I have been able to do to help safeguard Israelis,” Lazar says of his work for Operation Lifeshield. “This is a wonderful thing we are doing. I am glad to be of help. ”
Features
Patterns of Erasure: Genocide in Nazi Europe and Canada
By LIRON FYNE When we think of the word genocide, our minds often jump to the Holocaust, the mass-scale, systemic government-led murder of six million Jews by Nazi Germany during the Second World War, whose unprecedented scale and methods led to the very term ‘genocide’ being coined. On January 27th, 2026, we will bow our heads for International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the 80th year of remembrance.
Less frequently do we connect genocidal intent to the campaign against Indigenous peoples in Canada; the forced displacement, cultural destruction, and systematic killing that sought to erase Indigenous peoples. The genocide conducted by the Nazis and the genocidal intent of the Canadian government, though each unique in scale, motive, and implementation, share many conceptual similarities. Both were driven by ideologies of racial superiority, executed through governmental precision, and justified by the perpetrators as a moral mission.
At their core rests the concept of dehumanization. In Nazi Germany, Jews were viewed as subhuman, contaminated, and a threat to the ‘Aryan’ race. In Canada, Indigenous peoples were represented as obstacles to ‘progress’ and seen as hurdles to a Christian, Eurocentric nation. These ideas, this dehumanization, turned human beings into problems to be solved. Adolf Hitler called it the ‘Jewish question,’ leading to an official policy in 1942 called the ‘Final Solution to the Jewish Question,’ whereas Canadian officials called it the ‘Indian problem.’ The language is similar, a belief that one group’s existence endangers the destiny of another. The methods of extermination differed in practice and outcome, but the language of intent resembles one another.
The Holocaust’s concentration camps and carefully engineered gas chambers were designed for efficient, industrial-scale killing, resulting in mass murder. The well-organized plan of systematic degradation, deadly riots, brutal camp conditions, and designated killing centres were only a few of the ways the Nazis worked to eliminate the Jews. The Canadian government’s weapons were policy, assimilation and abandonment. Such as the Indian Act, reserves, and residential schools, which were all meant to ‘kill the Indian in the child,’ cutting generations off from their languages, families, and cultures. Thousands of Indigenous children died in residential schools, buried in unmarked graves near schools that called themselves places of learning. Both systems were backed by either religion or ideology; Nazi ideology brought together racist eugenic policies and virulent antisemitism, while Canada’s genocidal intent was supported by Christian Protestantism claiming to save Indigenous souls by erasing their heritage.
The Holocaust was a six-year campaign of complete industrialized extermination, mass murder with a mechanized intent, on a scale that remains historically unique. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission describes Canada’s indigenous genocide as a cultural one that unfolded over centuries through assimilation and the destruction of indigenous languages and identities. The Holocaust ended with the liberation of the camps and a global recognition of the atrocities committed. However, the generational trauma and dehumanization of antisemitism carry on. For Indigenous peoples in Canada, the effects of the genocidal intent continue to this day, visible in displacement, poverty, and intergenerational trauma. While these histories differ in form and timeline, both are rooted in dehumanization and the belief that some lives are worth less than others.
A disturbing similarity lies in the aftermath: silence and denial. The Holocaust forced the world to confront the atrocity with the vow of ‘Never Again,’ which has now been unearthed and reformed as ‘Never Again is Now,’ after the October 7th, 2023, massacre by Hamas. The largest massacre of Jewish people since the Holocaust, and the denial of the atrocities committed on October 7th, highlight the same Holocaust denial we see rising around the world. In Canada, for decades, the genocidal intent was hidden behind narratives of kindness and social progress. Only in recent years, through survivor testimony for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the discovery of unmarked graves, has the truth gained recognition. But acknowledgment without justice risks repeating the same patterns of erasure.
Comparing these atrocities committed is not about comparing pain or scale; it is about understanding the shared systems that enabled them. Both demonstrate how racism, superiority, and dehumanization can be used to justify the destruction of human beings. Remembering is not enough in Canada. True remembrance demands accountability, land restitution, reparations, and education that confronts Canada’s ongoing colonial legacy. When we say ‘Never Again is Now’, we hold collective action to combat antisemitism in all forms. The same applies to Truth & Reconciliation; it must be more than a slogan; we must apply action to Truth & ReconciliACTION.
Liron Fyne is a 12th-grade student at Gray Academy of Jewish Education in Winnipeg. They are currently a Kenneth Leventhal High School Intern at StandWithUs Canada, a non-profit education organization that combats antisemitism.