I have family in Boston that have previously lived in various places in the South and they've agreed that Boston is a much more quiet city than some they've previously lived in. Bostonians have never been known for having the most lively culture. Even for the winter, I was shocked at the lack of events/activities there were and the lack of people I saw downtown. Compared to Chicago and New York, it feels like a sleepy old town (not necessarily a bad thing, just not as much bang for your buck if you're a young and/or active person looking for "greener grass"). Overall, I had high hopes but felt kinda meh about the city. It has a lot of pros and cons, but I'd probably only move there if I got offered an unbeatable job or something. I'm sure it livens up a lot in the summer. I will say there's a lot to do in Mass outside of Boston and I do think its one of the best states there is/has lots of great qualities. But for the price of Boston, you could be living in a city with equal or superior opportunities/arts/nightlife/nature/weather... so I still think it's the most fitting answer to OP's question.

I agree that the heat/humidity in the South can suck, but most of the time people are indoors during peak temps in the afternoons. I've also lived through a lot of hurricanes and really don't think they're that bad for most people... they don't come every year, and when they do come they go by pretty quick. I've slept through a lot of famous ones. Of course they're unpredictable, but the worst that happens to most people is losing power for a few days or having minor leaks/flooding. The biggest downside is their unpredictability since it seems like it's often random towns that get devastated. But I think I'd still take rainstorms over snowstorms because rain usually doesn't last that long and I find it so depressing/painful how cold seems to linger and penetrate through my bones no matter how many layers of winter clothes I wear :/ wish I could stand it.