yyyes, sort of---but when someone says that their, I dunno, Erector set taught them about careful engineering and design, we don't tend to say "this is entirely about a very bright little boy (or girl) and not at all about Erector sets". Is that because construction sets tend to be more associated with boys? Almost any time I see a comment of the form "X taught me about Y when I was little", it usually really means "I was inspired to discover Y by some feature of X", not so much that X was an edutainment toy designed to teach Y.
I don't think recursive braiding of hair is ever something that's been suggested by My Little Pony toys in the same way construction is encouraged by Lego.
Drifting slightly off-topic--the self-similar structure of cauliflower is neat, but is put to shame by a closely related plant. Behold, the king of recursive food, the ultimate fractal vegetable: Romanesco Broccoli. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Fractal_B...
A diamond "in the rough" is not a diamond surrounded by roughness, but rather an unpolished diamond. Or at least that's how gemcutters use the term. The idea that a "diamond in the rough" is related to sorting diamonds from junk is probably a folk etymology.
Personally, I find it interesting to see this young person's mathematical mind manifest itself in such a way. She apparently adored her My Little Pony, and became consumed in pushing division into her braiding experience with it. Sure it was a prop, and she would have likely started doing the same thing elsewhere; but, it's engaging to see such an origin.
