Cartoon Conspiracies That Will Ruin Your Childhood

On the internet nowadays all you have to do is a speedy Google search to find some crazy ideas that someone has seriously mulled over and uploaded, probably in a blog... *shiftily avoids eye contact*. Many of these ideas are well-considered theories about all kinds of different things, for example real life events, political and media conspiracies, or TV and movie backstories. 

Popular TV shows, films and media companies come under scrutiny pretty much constantly, and the result of this is many fan theories. Famous ones include Illuminati involvement in practically all the things we watch, that incredibly clever Pixar theory, and everything that Disney has ever done (side note: I like Disney, leave it alone). Recently I read about some lesser-known theories, or conspiracies, primarily based on children's TV shows. These included (WARNING: some of these are quite disturbing and could change the way you look at these shows forever):

• The main SpongeBob SquarePants characters representing the seven deadly sins
• Wanda and Cosmo in Fairly Odd Parents representing Timmy's anti-depressants
• The Winnie the Pooh characters representing psychological disorders
• The Recess characters being the ghosts of children residing in a disused playground

However, the one that had the most impact on me was a theory about the best TV show ever made for 90s kids: the Rugrats. And it's really not a nice one.
The theory goes that the babies Tommy, Chuckie, Phil and Lil are figments of Angelica's imagination. Tommy was still-born, explaining why Stu spends much of his time in the basement inventing toys for his son who never had the chance to play. Chuckie died with his mother, giving cause for Chas's nervous tendencies. Finally, Betty and Howard had an abortion, so Angelica invented the twins as she didn't know the gender of the baby(ies). 

Yeah. I told you it wasn't nice, but it's also difficult to find any reason for it not to be plausible. After all, it does explain why Angelica can speak to both the adults and the babies. But what about the other children?

Dil: Angelica's cousin, being newborn, would've been too young to understand her characters and games for a while. Some people have gone so far as to say that once he had grown to question her imagination, Angelica hit him and caused brain damage, meaning that he played along in the future (I'll get to why she would do so later).
Kimi: The step-sister of Chuckie moved to America after her mother married Chas. Kimi previously lived in Paris, so it is not out of the question to assume that she only would've spoken French. After all, the babies couldn't speak to the adults anyway, so it would be very ambitious to think that she could have been fluent in two languages. Therefore, similarly to Dil, Kimi wouldn't have understood Angelica.
Susie: The angel to Angelica's devil, if you will. Susie seemed to be very understanding of the babies despite her young age of three or so. This caring nature could have extended to Angelica, where instead of ignoring her wild imagination, Susie played along to make her believe even more. What's more, Susie's parents were doctors, so it is possible that she might have picked up some of that sympathy from overhearing them. 
Finally, Angelica herself. Some of the detailed theories say that Angelica's mother either left or died when she was a baby. Her dad remarried to a woman with very little time or love for her stepdaughter. It's because of this that she becomes attached to her Cynthia doll, who she sees as the perfect female role model. She has very few friends or other children to play with as Dil is not yet born, Kimi is still in France and Susie is not around all that often. This makes her very lonely, and it results in her creating the babies in her imagination to play with and boss around in order to gain some control. The theory goes on to explain that her mental state continues to decline as she grows up, meaning that she might lash out at anyone who tells her that the babies aren't real (Dil, for example).

After all, in many of the Rugrats adventures Angelica is the cause of the babies getting into trouble, and she also often gets the blame in the end. It is in fact Angelica who comes up with the ideas, convinces herself to do them through talking to the babies, carries them out by pretending she's watching the babies do it, and then gets into trouble, the adults ignoring her repeated blaming of the non-existent babies. 

Thinking about it creeps me out. I really don't want to believe this theory, but like many of the others out there, it's feasible and the more I consider it, the more I'm inclined to see this as the truth behind the writers' ideas. I just really really hope it's a coincidence and the person who came up with this first is just very clever. 

Disney's 'Frozen': Why can't we Let It Go?

Whenever Walt Disney's world-famous animation company releases another popular kid's film, somewhere out there someone will nitpick every detail in order to find some kind of controversy within, and the most recent 'Frozen' is no different.

This particular wintery movie has attracted more negative attention than most, one controversy being over homosexual undertones. The article that I read begins with the opinion of Kevin Swanson, who accuses the film of being the devil's work and encourages women to be lesbians. Funnily enough, however, he doesn't mention any specific moments or plot points within 'Frozen' that displays this "evil", as he bluntly puts it. 

Kathryn Skaggs is another that is mentioned in the article. She apparently believes that 'Frozen' tries to normalise homosexuality in society by "celebrate(ing) that which is contrary to the commandments". She also focuses on the Oscar-winning song from the movie 'Let It Go', calling it "rebellious", "careless", "anti-obedience", "regardless" and "selfish". 

The LGBT community have in fact chosen the character Elsa from 'Frozen' as a mascot, almost, for empathy and unconditional love. But, spokespeople from that community themselves have said that the film doesn't necessarily link directly to homosexuality, it just has parallels. Elsa, trapped within her own secrets because of her society's views, could be a figure for any kind of person scared of how they might be perceived, be it homosexuality, physical and mental disabilities or even racial differences.  

Before reading this article, I had never heard anyone who has seen the movie say anything about homosexuality in relation to it. And actually, even if it does, does that matter? Surely a film that promotes acceptance within society is a good thing? Won't that idea stay with kids as they grow up, so that we will eventually have a respectful society in which everyone is included and happy to be themselves? Why has this been twisted into a negative thing to teach our children?

Imagine the amount of criticism that 'Frozen' and Disney as a whole would have received had there not been some kind of moral lesson to learn from it. Critics would have blasted the film as pointless and unnecessary, wouldn't they? Aren't we supposed to learn from what we watch? That's what makes Disney the biggest animation company in the world; their films have meaning, and many before 'Frozen' have had the same theme of acceptance: 'Dumbo' and 'Beauty and the Beast' being just two.

Differences give people different skills. 

Beauty can be found inside and out.

Mark Saal, a blogger, sums it up nicely:
"Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. If you look hard enough, you can find a hidden homosexual agenda in almost any song, movie or any other work of art."

And that works with any kind of controversy or criticism towards anything in the media. Disney films have had accusations made against them for years, practically since Walt himself began his wildly successful company, and I don't believe that people are going to stop any time soon. Whenever anything is popular, someone out there will purposely find fault and shout about it from the rooftops, making everything seem more dramatic and far worse than it actually is. Why can't we leave it alone and appreciate a Disney film for what it is: a happy, meaningful story that kids and adults alike will carry in their hearts forever. 

In the words of Elsa, just let it go!