The only unique virtue most protagonists have is that they are given the *role* of protagonist of the narrative.
Everything else is filtered through that sympathetic lens, including the relative merits/morality of their actions. Which means that we, as viewers/readers and especially as transformative works creators/consumers, ought to be aware that sometimes the only reason that we applaud/excuse/rationalize an action is because we’re given insight into (and, by extension, sympathize/empathize with) the person who does it.
There are also ingrained (and sometimes subconscious) cultural/personal biases, all of which combine to create a preference for a very specific range of characters, often white (and cishet, TAB, etc) men.
And if we don’t factor that into discussion/evaluation of characters/narratives, we lose a great deal of nuance and significance, and can sometimes perpetuate the structures we claim to be challenging/subverting/transforming.