By Paul Bean

Last night at the Bigger Picture in Waitsfield,  I had the opportunity to attend a screening of “Gone Guys” a 2025 documentary film directed by Chad Ervin and produced by Well Told Films.

The Film focuses on the “quiet crisis” of disengagement and isolation among boys and young men in Vermont and beyond. 

Drawing from Richard V. Reeves’ book Of Boys and Men, the 45-minute film uses personal stories, expert insights, and data to explore challenges like academic struggles, loneliness, substance abuse, suicide, and ‘radicalization.’

I have some thoughts about the film.

However, let me just start by saying that I am so thankful to the film producers and all the Vermont women and men who have spearheaded this project. 

In the film there was a lot of talk about the biological differences between boys and girls and in a state where even suggesting such things is considered taboo I am impressed by the makers of the film for stepping out in this way. 

Clearly they realize there is a serious problem amongst young men in our state and they want to do something about it. 

However— I challenge them all to go further.

There are some major holes in the film that I believe are a direct result of the problem they are trying to solve and the film itself barely scratches the surface as to why our young men and boys are struggling.

The best line in the entire film was something like  “we are treating young men and boys in school like they are maladaptive girls.”

This is 100% truth, however I make the case that the film tries to address this ‘maladaptive’ issue through that very lens the entire way through. 

For instance, towards the middle of the film, some of the speakers are asked to define “healthy masculinity.” One of the female speakers said something to the effect that defining this was problematic because we are still using the word “masculinity,” and there are negative associations about that word. 

Following the film there was a panel and all three of the male Vermont clinical experts who work with boys and men all struggled to provide a definition of “healthy masculinity “

Seems a little problematic in my view if we can’t even define healthy masculinity…

Many of the other speakers in the film attempted to define healthy masculinity as “emotional intelligence” and “openness,” both typically traits that are associated with females.

Throughout the entire film none of the traditional roles of male behavior were necessarily mentioned as healthy masculinity. For example leadership, purpose driven, provider, pillar of the community, courageousness, resilience, and persistence. 

It almost feels like the film was trying to tell young men and boys that it’s okay if they don’t want to be any of those things even though historically these are the traditional roles men have always found meaning in. 

My biggest criticism of the film is the fact that it is almost entirely through the lens of the public school system in Vermont which is so clearly failing everyone involved in it right now.

The film does not even talk about the Covid-19 scamdemic, a giant elephant in the room that no one in the film wanted to address especially considering Vermont’s complete and total adherence to totalitarian policies during that time.

The lockdowns, forced masking, and mandated government shots are all items that young men and boys are far more likely to have rebelled against and suffered with and the film doesn’t even mention any of it.

The film also does not mention:

• Video games
• Destructive aspects of modern feminism 
• Internet Pornography 
• The apocalyptic climate narrative
• Broken family dynamics between husband and wife
• How the boys are doing with their female counterparts 
• The rise of conservatism amongst young men and why it’s actually happening

In fact when the film actually DOES mention political rhetoric toward the end it makes the case that because of this ‘quiet crisis’ that these boys are becoming ‘radicalized’ by influencers online and other voices – and that this is leading to a rise in ‘authoritarianism.’  (Oh no! The boys like Trump! We gotta stop this from happening!)

Yeah no. I’m sure the ‘rise’ in ‘radicalization’ and ‘authoritarianism’ has nothing to do with the fact that we shut everyone into their homes for two years, forced masked them, shot them up with gene altering shots, told them their ideas and opinions don’t matter, and that they are a problem because they are white.

To be fair, the film makes the case that this has been a crisis developing over the last 40+ years, however I cannot imagine how Covid could have been left out of this.

One thing I do think the film nailed down was the concept of masculine role models and just how important they are. 

This issue starts in the homes. It starts with the dynamic between husband and wife, father and mother. And right now in Vermont there are way too many couples where it seems that females have taken a “masculine/breadwinner/provider” role within their household and statistics show this is not making anyone happier, especially women.

While data shows a clear increase in such arrangements, rising from about 6% of married heterosexual U.S. couples in 1960 to 25% today, with women as primary earners in 22% of households with young children, multiple studies do indicate a “happiness penalty” or lower satisfaction in these setups compared to traditional or dual-earner models, often due to lingering societal norms, unequal household chore division, and psychological stress associated, rather than the roles themselves.

For instance, a 2023 Institute for Family Studies survey of U.S. married adults found that female breadwinners reported significantly lower family-life satisfaction than women earning less than their spouses, with no similar dip for men regardless of earnings.

Let me be clear— this is not to say women should not work nor should they out earn their husbands if their lifestyle allows it or that is what they want. 

But let’s not pretend this is making anyone happier because it is not. 

Did you know that according to a recent Harvard study that if a husband loses his job the divorce rate increases by 33%? Meanwhile if a wife loses her job the likelihood of divorce does not change at all. 

Men have been told for like the last 30 years that they’re ‘not allowed’ to make certain jokes nor talk about certain subjects. Historically men have always been trailblazers and controversial, especially when it matters. They have always asked ‘dangerous’ questions, challenged the status quo, and have willingly run into deadly battles for thousands of years.

Today? There’s no battlefield. Have a non-government sanctioned political opinion at school? Detention. Want to be a provider for your wife and kids? Good luck buddy. She don’t need no’ man!

This film does not get to the root of the problem which is plainly the over-feminization of society. It seems to dance around the subject but clearly because of how feminized Vermont is, most of the men in the film seem to have some kind of apprehension about speaking freely and that there is some kind of self censorship going on…

Take the mask off our boys. Let them be controversial. Let them dare to challenge the status quo. Encourage fatherhood and teach them to provide. This is how we solve this crisis. 

To put it plainly, men need to stop being afraid of upsetting their women when it matters most, rather than teaching them how to be more ‘emotionally available,’ (which women say they like but they don’t).

That’s not to say that men cannot be emotional because we certainly are. It’s just not the same as women and we need to stop pretending it is.

Admittedly there was one part of the film that caused me to tear up a bit and that was when they were discussing the suicide rates amongst men.

I’ve know a handful of guys lost to suicide. Each of their deaths can be attributed to despair, some kind of substance abuse, and/or the loss of love in their lives. 

I believe that men can feel emotions more deeply and differently than their female counterparts. We just might not do it as often. We also don’t show it in the same way. 

Overall, again – I’m glad the film was mad and it’s a step in the right direction.

But until our mothers, teachers, female legislators, and colleagues are ready to admit there are no more than two ‘genders,’ then this issue won’t go away. 

Until our fathers, brothers, colleagues, and friends are ready to assume a truly masculine role, these boys are going to continue to turn towards ‘authoritarian’ figures.

If it keeps going this direction it’s not going to be pretty. 

All of the “progress” made over the last 30 years is going to be completely wiped if we don’t come to a middle ground on this problem.