On June 1, Shepherdstown, West Virginia will get its first-ever Pride parade. It is organized by performer and activist Joan Marie Moossy, who moved to the town permanently from New York City in 2022 after years of being a part-time resident. Moossy, now 70, experienced queer activism and community throughout her time in New York, where she counted as mentors and friends the great avant-garde performer Ethyl Eichelberger and Gilbert Baker, creator of the Pride flag. It was from people like them, she says, that she learned about the power of activism—that it really could create positive change and progress.

So, create she did. Shepherdstown, also home to Shepherd University, has a longstanding reputation for being queer friendly, one Moossy herself experienced for the first time over 30 years ago. This past October, Moossy’s idea for a Pride parade received a bounty of support from the Shepherdstown Town Council and local businesses, and it becomes a reality June 1 at 6 p.m. The town is a small one–about 1,537 people as of 2023– and the parade will travel the length of about two blocks, as the town’s other parades do. Moossy anticipates 25 groups–including everyone from the ACLU of West Virginia to Kevin Bacon’s SixDegrees charity to the Shepherdstown Presbyterian Church, among many others. In all, as many as 175 people will be marching in it. Local businesses have stepped up and created their own Pride programming for the weekend as well, all with the parade at its core.

The theme will be “Historic Firsts,” much like the parade itself, and will focus on the town’s LGBTQ+ history. Its Grand Marshal will be Rosemary Ketchum, the first openly trans person to be elected to public office in the state, and it will also feature salutes to Silas Starry (the town’s mayor and one of the country’s earliest openly gay elected officials) and Stephen Skinner, who became the state’s first out gay legislative member of the West Virginia House of Delegates when he was elected in 2013. Though the town previously had Pride festivities organized by John J. Mason and DJ Jearbear (who will also be honored during the parade), events like these hadn’t appeared in the city until 2014.

“I think it’s important to stand up and celebrate,” Moossy says of the parade, but for her it also extends to life in general. “I think it’s important to have fun…I tell all my young friends, the most revolutionary thing you can do right now is to be happy, and that having fun is an act of defiance.”

GOOD spoke to Moossy about the parade, queer Southern living, activism, and more.

pride, queer, west virginia, south, parade, shepherdstown
This homemade banner will appear in Shepherdstown, West Virginia's first ever Pride parade on June 1. Joan Marie Moossy

What made you move to Shepherdstown from New York?
My parents moved here in 1991 from Pittsburgh, and so I’ve been coming down here ever since. In 2012, I inherited the house. For 10 years, I went back and forth between here and New York. In 2022, I decided to move out of my New York apartment and come down here permanently. And it’s been great. I had done a few LGBTQ+ activities here before in 2018–I donated 100 rainbow flags for the businesses to put up during Pride, and that was really beautiful. I also worked with GLAAD and the local Pride organization to do a Trans Awareness Workshop, and that was an incredible experience. When I moved here permanently, I thought, I want to do something else. I thought of the idea of the Gay Pride Parade, just because they’d never had that. They had a picnic in Morgan’s Grove Park and a couple of years of street fairs, but they petered out. I proposed to have an annual Gay Pride Parade and I picked June 1 because I thought we could kick off Pride in the region and do some work promoting the other Pride organizations and towns around here.

What were your interactions with queer activism and queer life in New York?
I pretty much lived my whole adult life in the gay community. I was very lucky to work with Ethyl Eichelberger in the 80s, and he was a well-known avant-garde playwright by the time I started working with him, which helped kick-start my career as an actress. That was an extremely lucky thing for me. He wrote parts for me in his plays and was one of the great mentors of my life in general. In the 90s, I was lucky to meet and make friends with Gilbert Baker, who created the original rainbow flag in 1978 in San Francisco. He was another big influence on me in terms of designing protests, with the type of banners you make and how to make them. I was inspired that someone I knew personally was able to change the world, because he didn’t just design the flag, but he worked his whole life to make it a ubiquitous symbol around the world for gay people, and it worked. That impressed me and made me believe that I could change the world, too. So that’s what I’m always striving for. Even the smallest thing that can make an impact in someone else’s life can go on to have a cultural impact in society. I was very lucky in New York to have a lot of high point experiences that very deeply influenced me with the idea that activism could work, that you could work hard at something and get a good, big win out of it, in terms of moving the culture forward. I know we’re kind of in a regressive period right now. Of course, progress doesn’t always go on a linear continuum. The LGBTQ+ community is under attack, especially our trans siblings. I wanted to step up and have an influence, especially on young activists, to show that if you keep working, you can win on certain issues and remind people that we’ve had a lot of big wins over the years to recognize LGBTQ+ people as major contributors in our society. These kinds of wins are important, inspiring the next generation of activists not to feel like we’re just always losing. We’ve had big wins, and we’re gonna win again.

queer history, shepherdstown, west virginia, banner, pride
The theme of Shepherdstown's first Pride parade is Joan Marie Moossy

What was your experience of Shepherdstown’s relationship to the LGBTQ community when you arrived?
When my parents moved here in 1991 I came and spent about three weeks here when they were in Europe. When they came back, I said, hey, you know you moved to a gay town, right? I just saw so many gay people here. My parents went on to be very close with a lot of gay couples that were their age. Shepherdstown has a long history of gay residents, and still does. There’s still a lot of LGBTQ+ people. We’ve got a lot of young queer people here, which I saw very clearly demonstrated when I went this fall to the Appalachian Queer Film Festival. We currently have a gay mayor, James Gatz, and he’s the third gay mayor here. We have Shepherd University, so we have a constant influx of young people. I think that creates a very big interest and brings in a lot of kids who feel safe and queer here.

Why do you think the parade is important now?
I think it’s important to stand up and celebrate. I think it’s important to have fun. I tell all my young friends, the most revolutionary thing you can do right now is to be happy and having fun is an act of defiance. I wanted to have just a quick, wild, crazy celebration where everybody had a really good time. Our parade route is only two blocks long. It’s a small town, so even the Christmas parade that has 100 groups marching in it only takes an hour. We have 25 groups, and it will probably be about 20 minutes to half an hour. That’s why I say fast and furious. But I think it’s going to be very colorful and fun, and then there’s so much else to do. It’s going to be over by about 6:30pm, which is dinner time. This is a tourist town, so of course, there’s a lot of beautiful restaurants and wonderful shops, and there’s going to be a drag show afterward. There’ll be lots for people to do–hang out, shop in town, enjoy the evening and get to know that this is a gay-friendly town. People are welcome here.

When I proposed the idea of a Gay Pride Parade in October, I got a unanimous yes right away. I expected to wait a few weeks to hear. Since then, the businesses have just stepped up right behind me to be incredibly supportive. We’ve got the all-day Countdown to Pride event on Saturday hosted by The Roving Peregrine Theater Company. Kinky Boots is going to show at the local movie theater on Saturday, too. And then on Sunday, before the parade, the Shepherdstown Presbyterian Church is going to have two Pride services in the morning. A yoga group called Mahalo Wellness is going to conduct a free yoga session, and then the local bookstore, Four Seasons Bookstore, is going to have a Banned Books Club meeting, and they’re going to discuss Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe. The parade will be at 6 p.m. and after the parade, there’ll be a drag show at Panagiota’s Taste of Greece restaurant. That’ll be hosted by Chasity Vain, and it’s called the Royal Revue. The drag community is very big in this region, very supportive of one another, and has been incredibly supportive of the parade. So I think the town, the citizens, are really behind it, and I’m hoping for a big crowd in the audience.

What would you want people to know about queer life in the South that you don’t think they do?
I think the rural South is the vanguard of the gay liberation movement now. Not that cities don’t have gay activism, but I think that there’s a surge of activism in the rural south, and particularly in this mid-Atlantic area. I’d like people to know that this is nothing new here. We do have a queer history that goes quite far ways back, including our first gay mayor in 1972. People are always surprised by that. Like many groups, the history is buried. I think it’s important to have this kind of history brought to people’s attention. The queer community has existed in Shepherdstown and all over West Virginia and all over the South for many, many years. And it may be a history that’s not been told yet, but is a fascinating history, and it’s a history that should be told.

  • Italian man claims to be ‘human cheetah’ with lightning-fast reflexes
    Photo credit: CanvaA man with fast reflexes.

    At first glance, this probably looks like a camera trick. Ken Lee, an Italian content creator, has built a massive online following by doing something that doesn’t quite feel real. Viewers refer to him as the “human cheetah” because it appears he has near-instant reflexes.

    Grabbing objects out of the air with uncanny precision, flicking clothespins and lighters, and throwing a blur of punches and kicks at impossible speeds, it is easy to call him unbelievable. Half the audience thinks his viral speed videos are fake. The other half is just as convinced they are watching something incredibly rare.

    Hands so fast they blur time

    In the video above, a timer runs to confirm its authenticity. In what looks like half a second, he reaches out and snags the lighter from the table. To prove it is real, he does it twice.

    Having amassed millions of followers on his TikTok page, the identity behind the mysterious influencer remains largely unknown. Active since around 2022, with almost 100 million accumulated likes, Lee has cultivated a fandom around his self-proclaimed “Superhero per Hobby!”

    Do you believe it is real? Is this person the fastest human alive? Many followers cannot wait for the next video to be posted. Plenty of his fervent fans are Italian, so sifting through the remarks takes a bit of hunting. Here are some comments that sum up how much people enjoy the fun and the spectacle:

    “Ken lee the fastest and the best”

    “Most dangerous human”

    “Is this what the lighter sees before my homie steals it”

    “It was sped up during he grabbed the lighter, if u count up with the timer u would be off by like 0,5 seconds whenever he grabs the lighter.”

    “If the flash were human”

    “How is it possible to get such powers ?”

    “I blinked and I missed it”

    People love good entertainment

    The awe of peak performance attracts people to watch elite athletes, musicians, or even dancers. There is something that deeply satisfies all of us when a human appears to push a skill to its limit. Whether it is real or fake seems to matter less than the opportunity to chime in on some good entertainment.

    How far could any of us go by practicing and repeating a particular motion over and over until it is mastered? Beneath the flashy nickname and his viral speed videos, Lee’s content has a way of drawing people in. This is not a superpower. Just repetition. Focus. Obsession. And maybe some digital wizardry.

    Testing the science of speed

    If you wish to question the validity of Lee’s performances, maybe some basic science can help. Human reaction time is not just a reflex. A 2024 study found that the nervous system can fine-tune responses in real time. Practice can make movements appear almost automatic.

    It has been well established in research that the gap between seeing something and responding has a limit. A 2025 study concluded that the most elite extremes allow for reaction times of 100 milliseconds. At that speed, the human brain can barely process that something has happened.

    Science explains Lee is not necessarily moving as fast as we might perceive him to be. And therein lies all the fun of it. We cannot prove it is real, nor can we actually prove that it is fake.

    Maybe Lee is the “fastest man alive” or the so-called “human cheetah.” Or maybe he is just a remarkable entertainer. Either way, he has clearly tapped into something strange and fascinating: a blend of human ability and fantasy that people do not want to miss.

    To give context to Lee’s videos, watch this performance on Tú Sí Que Vales:

  • Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes
    Photo credit: LisaStrachan/iStock via Getty Images Fear not: There isn’t anything that needs saving.

    As a linguistics professor, I’m often asked why English is decaying before our eyes, whether it’s “like” being used promiscuouslyt’s being dropped deleteriously or “literally” being deployed nonliterally.

    While these common gripes point to eccentric speech patterns, they don’t point to grammatical annihilation. English has weathered far worse.

    Let’s start with something we can all agree on: Old English, spoken from approximately A.D. 450 to 1100, is pretty unintelligible to us today. Anyone who’s had the pleasure of reading “Beowulf” in high school knows how different English back then used to sound. Word endings did a lot more grammatical work, and verbs followed more complicated patterns. Remnants of those rules fuel lingering debates today, such as when to use “whom” over “who,” and whether the past tense of “sneak” is “snuck” or “sneaked.”

    The language went on to experience centuries of tumult: Viking invasions, which introduced Old Norse influence; Anglo-Norman French rule, which shifted the language of the elite to French; and 18th-Century grammarians, who dictated norms with their elocution and grammar guides.

    In that time, English has lost almost all of the more complex linguistic trappings it was born with to become the language we know and – at least, sometimes – love today. And as I explain in my new book, “Why We Talk Funny: The Real Story Behind Our Accents,” it was all thanks to the way that language naturally evolves to meet the social needs of its speakers.

    From dropping the ‘l’ to dropping the ‘g’

    The things we tend to label as “bad” or sloppy English – for instance, the “g” that gets lost from our -ing endings or the deletion of a “t” when we say a word like “innernet” – actually reflect speech habits that are centuries old.

    Take, for example, “often.” Originally spoken with the “t,” that pronunciation gradually became less favored around the 15th century, alongside that “l” in “talk” and the “k” in know. Meanwhile, the “s” now stuck on the back of verbs like “does” and “makes” began as a dialectal variant that only became popular in 16th-century London. It gradually replaced “th” whenever third persons were involved, as in “The lady doth protest too much.”

    While dropping the “l” in talk may have been initially frowned upon, today it would be strange if you pronounced the letter. And the shift makes sense: It smoothed out some linguistic awkwardness for the sake of efficiency.

    If people learned to look at language more like linguists, they might come around to seeing that there is more than one perspective on what good speech consists of.

    And yes, that absolutely is a sentence ending with a preposition – something many modern grammar guides discourage, even though the idea only took hold after 18th-century grammarian Robert Lowth intimated it was a less elegant choice based on the model of Latin.

    Though Lowth voiced no hard and fast rule against it, many a grammar maven later misconstrued his advice as an admonition. Just like that, a mere suggestion became grammatical law.

    The rise of the grammar sticklers

    Many of today’s ideas about what constitutes correct English are based on a singular – often mistaken – 19th-century view of the forces that govern our language.

    In the late 18th century, the English-speaking world began experiencing class restructuring and higher literacy rates. As greater class mobility became possible, accent differences became class markers that separated new money from old money.

    Emulation of upper-crust speech norms became popular among the nouveau riche. With literacy also on the rise, grammarians and elocutionists raced to dictate the terms of “proper” English on and off the page, which led to the rise of usage guides and dictionaries that were eager to sell a certain brand of speech.

    Another example of grammarian angst reconfiguring the view of an otherwise perfectly fine form is the droppin’ of the “g.” It became so tied to slovenly speech that it was branded with an apostrophe in the 19th century to make sure no one missed its lackadaisical and nonstandard nature.

    Up until the 19th century, however, no one seemed to care whether one pronounced it as “-in” or “-ing.”

    Evidence suggests that -ing wasn’t even heard as the correct form. Many elocution guides from the 18th century provide rhyming word pairs like “herring/heron,” “coughing/coffin” and “jerking/jerkin,” which suggest that “-in” may have been the preferred pronunciation of words ending with “-ing.” Even writer and satirist Jonathan Swift – a frequent lobbyist for “proper” English – rhymes “brewing” with “ruin” in his 1731 poem “Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D..”

    Embrace the change

    Language has always shifted and evolved. People often bristle at changes from what they’ve known to what is new. And maybe that’s because this process often begins with speakers that society usually looks less favorably on: the young, the female, the poor, the nonwhite.

    But it’s important to remember that being disliked and bad are not the same thing – that today’s speech pariahs are driven by the same linguistic and social needs as the Londoners who started going with “does” instead of “doth” or dropped the “t” in often.

    So if you think the speech that comes from your lips is the “correct” version, think again. Thou, like every other English speaker, art literally the product of centuries of linguistic reinvention.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

  • 10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild
    Photo credit: Ian Taylor PhotographerTwo young children play in the grass.

    It sounds like the plot of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. However, in the mid-2000s, it was a very real and very controversial reality television experiment.

    Footage from the UK Channel 4 documentary Boys and Girls Alone is captivating audiences all over again. It offers a fascinating and chaotic look at what happens when you remove parents from the equation.

    The premise was simple but high stakes. Twenty children, aged 11 and 12, were split into two groups by gender. Ten boys and ten girls were placed in separate houses and told to live without adult supervision for five days.

    The Setup

    While there were safety nets in place, the day-to-day living was entirely up to the kids. A camera crew was present but instructed not to intervene unless safety was at risk. The children could also ring a bell to speak to a nurse or psychiatrist.

    The houses were fully stocked with food, cleaning supplies, toys, and paints. Everything they needed to survive was there. They just had to figure out how to use it.

    The Boys: Instant Chaos

    In the boys’ house, the unraveling was almost immediate. The newfound freedom triggered a rapid descent into high-energy anarchy.

    They engaged in water pistol fights and threw cushions. In one memorable instance, a boy named Michael covered the carpet in sticky popcorn kernels just because he could.

    The destruction eventually escalated to the walls. The boys covered the house in writing, drawing, and paint. But the euphoria of freedom eventually crashed into the reality of consequences.

    “We never expected to be like this, but I’m really upset that we trashed it so badly,” one boy admitted in the footage. “We were trying to explore everything at once and got too carried away in ourselves.”

    Their attempts to clean up were frantic and largely ineffective. Nutrition also took a hit. Despite having completed a cooking course, the boys survived mostly on cereal, sugar, and the occasional frozen pizza. By the end of the week, the house was trashed, and the group had fractured into opposing factions.

    The Girls: Organized Society

    The girls’ house looked like a different planet.

    In stark contrast to the mayhem next door, the girls immediately established a functioning society. They organized a cooking roster, with a girl named Sherry preparing their first meal. They baked cakes. They put on a fashion show. They even drew up a scrupulous chores list to ensure the house stayed livable.

    While their stay wasn’t devoid of interpersonal drama, the experiment highlighted a fascinating divergence in socialization. Left to their own devices, the girls prioritized community and maintenance. The boys tested the absolute limits of their environment until it broke.

    The documentary was controversial when it aired, with critics questioning the ethics of placing children in unsupervised situations for entertainment. But what made it so enduring, and why footage keeps resurfacing years later, is what it reveals about how kids are socialized long before anyone puts them in a house together. The boys weren’t born anarchists and the girls weren’t born organizers. They arrived at those houses already shaped by years of being told, implicitly and explicitly, what boys do and what girls do. Whether that’s a nature story or a nurture story is the question the documentary keeps asking without quite answering, which is probably why people are still watching and arguing about it nearly two decades later.

    This article originally appeared two years ago. It has been updated.

Explore More Culture Stories

Internet

Italian man claims to be ‘human cheetah’ with lightning-fast reflexes

Culture

Despite all the likes, literallys and dropped g’s, English isn’t decaying before our eyes

Culture

10 boys and 10 girls were left alone in separate houses and the different results are just wild

Media

9-year-old girl asks Steph Curry why his shoes aren’t in girls’ sizes. The response was perfect.