What I never understood about this, is Angel is incredibly more attractive than Spike. Like they aren't even in the same league (now I know this is subjective), but I feel if you take out their personalities/characterizations and just simply place David and James side by side David wins the sexy contest.
It's something about these psychopathic vampire men. Like I have never understood the craze over Damon Salvatore (He is on the vampire diaries). I love a sadistic, twisted, charismatic villain. But, I don't want them with my heroine or my hero.
Plus, I usually find the "damaged" vampires like (Stefan, TVD and Angel) more interesting and complex.
While I find the bad boy trope like (Damon, TVD and Spike) over played and one dimensional.
To each their own I suppose; but this obsession writers get over their psychopathic vampire male love interest is usually detrimental to the show...
My GUESS on it is it comes from a certain media track (though this isn't the only possibility, adult role models can create a preference for better and worse, but generally speaking media, adult role models, and peers tend to overall mesh despite cosmetic differences, but that's probably less true today than for my generation and earlier). Among archetypes in major faerie tale romances that can translate into many Disney movies includes the knight in shining armor and the beast/bad boy. A woman typically finds her place by being proper and getting carried away by a prince to be taken care of, or she sacrifices all for say the Beast (there are different versions of this) that then results in the same reward.
As one gets older, assuming one is actually interested in romance and/or thinking that's the primary purpose of one's future, then the romance genres aimed at girls tend to cater to both of these that seem to be the most popular, one being a knight in shining armor (as Angel could be), or the Bad Boy (like Spike). A few other archetypes are also popular.
The Bad Boy is typically portrayed as misunderstood. Females (I suppose gay men as well) are gifted with the ability to look into a guy's butt and abs to see into his soul, who he really is, and if she can "change" him (yeah, I'm being a bit tongue in cheek there, but I think there is something to that, and it's something many people, men and women, do, with different standards applying to people based on how they look). People don't like him so if she does then he can appreciate her, and come to love her as unconditionally as she did him...and if she had to sacrifice friends and family (as Buffy does with Spike, following the typical Bad Boy Love Story formula--especially how it's pretty much the fault of everyone else) to prove her undying devotion, then better still, and better the reward (it also allows the author/screenwriter to throw in some drama to keep an audience). Of course a bad boy can also indulge secret sexual desires, and perhaps can be (unreasonably in many cases, though not in fantasy, of course!) expected to initiate them, and thus take responsibility for such things, or at least be safe to share herself in that way. This also seems to be the favorite of those who want obsessive, passionate love as well (just one more reason to cut others out if they can).
Imagine growing up with that, to insert yourself in the narrative over and over (by book, movie, etc), so putting yourself in the ideal (if unrealistic) situation over and over, the brain is habitual, and can imprint on this...and other sources have their own affect which often strengthen it. This is why some women can love Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey (and I've seen much worse from romances I've checked out from the library), though I can see why some very young girls might relate to Bella (as Edward treats her in a way much how adults treat children with orders, over protectiveness while also being a bit scary, lack of privacy, even punishment, so to them that's just normal whether a guy is a love interest or not). Those like me who grew up with a different media track (and also those I know who were raised more on academic works) not only fail to see the appeal, but are gobsmacked that such books make the bestseller list. In retrospect, I'm glad I was shunned by girls from age 6-10 as I think it helped me a lot (by keeping me away from a lot of girl media and expectations), though it has contributed to why it's hard for me to fit into general society.
I don't consider myself "above" this social programming, I just consider myself lucky to have escaped most of this.
I didn't just pull this out of my butt, I've thought a lot about it, and for years I thought it might be tied to sexual orientation (though I couldn't see how, just that I noticed trends tied to orientation), though I looked at enough straight women and lesbian (etc) exceptions and realized what the actual common factors (as far as I could tell) were was for all of us (whatever we liked), though this is ultimately my best guess in trying to figure this out.
And as I had to make myself appealing to the general public, I spent some significant time studying the way people think, including men's and women's magazines, and the bestsellers (fiction and nonfiction, and that includes the romance genre), as well as enduring some TV and radio talk shows (since tapping my friends meant other oddballs rather than the general public--don't mistake your social circle for the general public as too many people do, instead look at how the public votes, including with their time and money). I've gleaned many observations about it, and I can now fit into general society, though I never feel fully comfortable there.
Oh, btw...you might like reading
Writing a Romance Novel For Dummies (I believe this was the book) that I was lucky enough to find in the library, and was very helpful to me at the time. It describes the different romantic figures (including those like Angel and Spike) and plots, and how appealing they are to the general public (and includes some advice for niche markets), which gives insights into what people in general along with specific audiences (according to market research) want in their books, shows, and movies.
