I see some ranting in here regarding Blueblood and why he gets a lot of sour hatred while worse characters are praised.
Some people say sexism, some people say anti-elitism, some people say color and then chalk it all up to Fanon hypocrisy…but frankly, none of that makes any sense to me at all. Instead all those claims only seem to be looking at the surface but don't approach the deeper reasons
Let me tell you how I interpret the treatment of Blueblood:
For starters consider how the characters are used and how that usage impacts the reception that the character gets.
There isn't much you can say about Blueblood. He is introduced as a regular stuck-up rich guy stereotype and that's about the extent of his entire character.
Yes Discord, Moon and Trixie were introduced as mere villians for you to boo at, but at least they were developed characters. You can say a lot about most of the MLP villains, their motives, intentions, character traits, background and behavior. Blueblood…not so much.
It seems that Blueblood was introduced into the show not as a character but simply as an object to disapprove of. And disapprove of Blueblood, the Fanon did.
The Fanon cannot really build on a character like that easily, it's easier to just reject it
Plus if I recall our previous discussion on this correctly; there are also the points that we have less trouble relating to comical evil villains than we do with rich snobs. We can understand being evil as it is such a common subject in every story, we know what drives characters to be evil. But unless any of us happen to be millionaires, we don't understand what it is like to be so rich and wealthy that your narcissism shoots through the roof.
Lastly there's the even more important point of how interesting the character is. Have you noticed a correlation between how interesting a character is and how much fan fare it gets?
Discord is an interesting character, he's made of different body parts and warps physics. Nightmare Moon was an interesting character, she controls the night and had a vengeful feud with her sister. Even Trixie was an interesting character: she's a magician with a superiority complex and speaks about herself in the 3rd person
But Blueblood? Just a "rich snob". He's just not that interesting and of course the Fanon will care for that character less.
The result: We understand characters like Chrysalis, Discord, Trixie and Gilda. We can relate to them and their evil ways, we can build on those characters and develop them because it's interesting and fun to do so. But Blueblood doesn't get that same treatment because he is boring and unrelatable. Not so much because of gender or color or anything else, or at least not likely.
Any of this making sense?
[edit]
@Phoneix
Thank you, that's the sort of thing I am getting at. Bluebloods presentation in the show just doesn't compare to how other villains are presented so obviously we are going to appreciate the character less.
@Regarding Chrysalis fanart
Would Chrysalis get all the fanart she did if she was male? Absolutely. She's the closest thing to Zerg/Tyrannid this show has ever gotten and we have plenty of Starcraft/Warhammer fans in this fandom who couldn't resist.
Would we still have the cute/sexy fanart? Probably not, or at least less of that. So I agree there would be less fanart but my point is that it would still be there. Notice how much fanart is driven by her concept of being a hive queen for a swarm of shapeshifting monsters. That's not gender specific.