I am in the US so I don't know much about the UK specifically, but generally speaking I would think about starting small and working your way up.
For example, in the US there are many state or national parks that offer campsites where you could rent a basic cabin so you don't have to worry about a tent. Or you could get a site with a covered pavilion with tables and benches so you don't have to worry about seating or shade. Many have built in charcoal grills and fire pits. I would also recommend you start with somewhere that has access to plumbing and maybe even electricity for your first few go rounds.
There are also privately owned parks that cater to the "glamping" crowd where you can have access to a fancier cabin and other amenities like swimming pools, sports equipment, etc.
As far as camping equipment I would highly recommend you start off buying used gear. Good equipment can be pricey because it is meant to last, and you are not even sure if this is something you're going to stick with yet. Try out some used gear and see what you like and don't like about it. If you decide to stick with this you can always invest in better gear later. The basics should include a sleeping bag, tent, and maybe a propane stove. There are many things you probably already have or can make do with something. For example you don't need to go buy specialty camping cookware when you can just bring a pan and utensils from home. You don't need a backpack unless you plan to do some actual backpacking; a trunk or duffel bag is fine if you're driving into your site.
Therapists have a wide variety of personal beliefs and professional opinions. They're people just like anyone else in any other field.
Unfortunately even well-meaning therapists can do a lot of harm when they forget to take a non-judgmental stance and just be curious about their clients.
Does anyone think the officers who did this are going to face legal consequences? Does anyone think they feel a shred of remorse for what they did? Does anyone think that after they come back from their paid leave that any of their fellow officers are going to speak out against their return?
I don't agree with their religion and they shouldn't have even been there. But to say that they were tourists is unfair. They were full-time missionaries. They (sadly) dedicated their lives to spreading their religion. They also probably tried to help meet basic needs like food, shelter, etc.
Religion is complicated and this was a preventable tragedy.
CAMEOS: Cap, Iron Man, T'Chaka, Dr Strange, Psylocke, Alpha Flight, Peter and MJ, Daredevil, Cloak and Dagger, Silver Samurai, Omega Red, Crimson Dynamo, Darkstar, Mr Fantastic (Morph). I probably missed some but that's what I could remember
CRITICISMS: Rogue seemed to make up with everyone a little too easily, but I guess seeing Magneto rip out Logan's Adamantium will do that. Phoenix was a cheap get out of jail free card, especially considering it just kind of disappeared after it freed the X-Men
HIGHLIGHTS: All the Blue team members individually beating down Bastion. Rogue: "HIS NAME WAS GAMBIT! REMEMBER IT!" The sentinel Trojan horse with gold team. The goodbye between Nathan and Scott/Jean. "I should have been in those stories!" "You were." Mother Askani! We are going to get to see Scott and Jean raise Nathan!
And the post credits scene! We are definitely getting Gambit as Death!
This is easily one of the best things Marvel has done. A total nostalgia trip loaded with fan service for all us 90s kids. It stayed true to the original while becoming more mature at the same time. All the praise to Beau DeMayo. Whatever he did to get fired must have been bad, because this was an excellent product and it will be a shame to lose him.
Totally agree with the broader point, but it won't be the arrival of Tiamut that draws him because the story will be in the 1960s. Tiamut will still be gestating. However, maybe that will be the thing that stays his hand if the heroes fail?
Belt loops would have been for Cub Scouts. Merit badges are for Boy Scouts. There's definitely plenty you can do at home for both, but with merit badges you need a merit badge counselor, who may or may not be your leader
Well they already tried suing them when they began accepting girls and changed their name the first time to Scouts BSA, but that didn't work. But truthfully the two organizations have different missions and methods.
Historically, a lot of girls who joined GSUSA thinking it was going to be Boy Scouts for girls were disappointed and would leave. GSUSA is more about empowering girls through community engagement and exploring careers. Yes there can also be camping, hiking, etc but these are more or less optional components, up to each troop to integrate. Rank advancement is based on age and grade level, while awards are based on merit.
Boy Scouts is much more focused on outdoor skills and citizenship. These are integrated into the program in that advancement in rank is based solely on merit and demonstrating proficiency with these skills. You can spend six years in Boy Scouts and never make it past Tenderfoot.
So for girls who want more emphasis on the outdoors built into their program, Scouting America would be the better option. For those that want more flexibility and are less outdoorsy, GSUSA is still an option. Both are good programs. I have kids in both. There are some things I like better about GSUSA and some I like more in Boy Scouts. I think Boy Scouts is a more challenging program overall, but GSUSA's Gold Award is way more challenging to achieve than an Eagle project. I definitely prefer GSUSA not having a religious requirement.
Both programs will continue to adapt and change. Both have been experiencing declines in membership for decades anyway, so there's bigger problems that they're facing.
A narcissistic collective intent on shit-stirring for lulz, immune to logic or any sense of morality? Suddenly Star Trek TNG makes a lot more sense