You’re going to have a strained analogy either way, but you might be able to come up with something that is more person centric. Your analogy focuses on the functionality of the spoon, fork, and spork, not the person’s needs - I could argue that a single person’s concerns are encapsulated by the spork, and as such it doesn’t need to be split up. Realistically, the existence of the spork gives credence to this - it wouldn’t exist if a separate spoon and fork were superior for all user needs.

Definitely change the text, though, either way.