Bitcoin is a service, not a commodity.
It's a big transaction log. When you spend them, you provide the service of signing your transaction with a private key that the network agrees controls the pool of coins from which are spending. You are exchanging this service for the goods and services the recipient of that transaction agreed to provide you with (hopefully).
In the end the only value of a wallet is the ability to provide this service. That's why when a wallet is destroyed those coins it controlled are lost to the network forever.
"Real" currencies are essentially also this kind of service, since we moved off the gold standard. The only value fiat currency has is what someone will agree to give you in exchange for providing the service of telling your bank to move some numbers to their account (whether you do this electronically, or indirectly through cash).
The main differential is that Bitcoin is founded on the mutual trust of all participants, whereas fiat currencies are founded almost entirely on confidence in a few entities - the government, and the banks. Bitcoin probably wins on that count.
The difficulty here is that there is no way to repudiate transactions after the fact - unlike with a bank, there is no "Undo". But this is also a feature. To provide an ability to do this would require a central body to have key escrow of your wallet keys, which would completely undermine the whole network AND be a rich target for exactly this sort of theft.
The problem is that people don't understand Bitcoin. Trusting a web-wallet is an entirely different proposition to trusting a bank, but they are used to thinking about it as if it was a bank.