It is frequently believed that bad boys are attractive to a significant proportion of women, especially younger women. Andrew Tate's current popularity (and men like him) seems to give exhibition to this idea. But I don't think the theory is quite right. Women aren't generally attracted to bad boys - bad boys tend to make poor, unreliable and ultimately unsatisfying partners. It's more the case that women are attracted to certain traits, like confidence, extraversion and machismo, that are found in excess in many bad boys, but are misleading signposts in the quest to find a high quality beloved.
I will tell you what I think it's like with an analogy. When I was a child, we had some family friends who had a house in fairly bad repair, but with a fantastic swimming pool and an awesome games room in their outside garage. As children, we loved to go there for the pool and the games, but being so young, we were largely oblivious to the state of the rest of the house. Over time, the house declined into an even worse state, and eventually, by the time we were teenagers, even the swimming pool was neglected to a point where it became a grotty eyesore.
Similarly, bad boys have characteristics, like the swimming pool and games room, that in the short term superficially attract women who are more likely to be swayed and charmed by things like confidence, extraversion and machismo - but because the rest of the house is in such bad disrepair, the long-term prospects are full of hazards and disappointments.
The swimming pool and games room made the house visits more appealing, but the quality of the house, and how it is attended to, like the bad boy, can only be measured properly when everything is taken into account - where it is then found to be lacking.
