There is this whack hack of a dude called Jordan Peterson who works on psychology and has a theory about female attraction towards men.

The idea is that when it comes to human interactions, and not just romantic relationships or sex, there are mainly two types of people: agreeable and disagreeable. Agreeable people are those who place the other person's interest above their own, so they might come off as "push-overs" or "weak" even if they aren't really. Disagreeable people place their own interest before anyone elses, making them seem "jerks" even if they're not necessarily doing anything immoral.

As Peterson says, if you ask a disagreeable person what they want they will tell you right away and they will tell you how they're going to get it. They just see what they want and they go for it, regardless of what others think. Agreeable people, on the other hand, don't even know what they want if you ask them: they're so accostumed to doing what other people tell them to or expect of them that they struggle to have personal desires of their own.

However, it is true that agreeableness is a good indicator of moral conduct. Men are generally less agreeable than women and that's why, according to Peterson, there are way more men than women in prison. Men tend to be more self-centered which might result in them being more criminalistic ("I take what I want and nobody can't stop me"). Women, on the contrary, tend to be more agreeable to avoid conflict so they're more likely to be the victims rather than the agressors.

Do you think the "bad boys" and the "nice guys" that people talk about so much are simply disagreeable men vs agreeable men? Maybe the "bad boys" aren't necessarily bad people but simply disagreeable men who come off as jerks even if they're not doing anything wrong, and the "nice guys" might be just human doormats who are too insecure and too little self-centered to ever get what they want, if they even know what they want.