So, re: this article I…

So, re: this article I recently bought Kavi two of the 'Friends' pink sets (the basic box + the treehouse). They were her first real Legos, as opposed to the gender-neutral Duplos she and Anand had been playing with. She loves the Friends Legos, and does a lot of role-play / storytelling with them, rather than building, so yes, they're closer to doll-toys than building-toys for her right now. Which is fine, but I'd like to encourage her to do more building, esp. since she has plenty of other doll options. (Including, sigh, a few Barbies and Disney princesses. She begged, and we caved. I blame the girls at pre-school, and the pre-school for having them to begin with.)

I do feel like there's a gap in what Legos currently offers -- Kavi's not that interested in fighting, and a lot of the other Legos are very fight-oriented, in one way or another. I guess we'll get her some more basic Legos and possibly some city ones ones. But it's frustrating (VERY) that the city ones seem to have 'boy' figures in all the roles. That's the main reason I didn't buy them to begin with, and got the Friends ones.

But I'm not happy with a lot of the Friends options (like the hair salon), so I don't want to buy her more of those either. Boo. And while I love fantasy, she's already getting a lot of 'princesses care about being pretty' messages from the world, so I'm hesitant to get her many castle Legos. (Much as I would love to play with them myself.) We counter those as best we can with a variety of subversive princess books, but it's a pretty lopsided battle.

Also, Legos are expensive, dammit. If I'm going to spend $50 on a toy, I'd prefer not to be so conflicted about it.