It's not that they cannot be used. You can use any data structure for any purpose if you torture it enough. It's that the metaphors are terrible.
> "a list can be used for a recipe"
A recipe is not just a list of steps, it's also a list of ingredients, potentially an introduction, some pictures, etc.
Ask a kid to draw you a mock recipe, you won't just get a list of steps in return.
> "a set can be used to list all the unique ingredients you need to buy for a week's meals"
Ingredients have quantities attached. If I tell you to make a cake you need sugar, an egg and flour and give you all the steps but no quantities, you're not making a cake. A map is the obvious choice for storing ingredients.
I agree that ingredients are unique, but they have attached data which is just as relevant as the ingredient itself.
> "a map can be used for a cookbook"
I just don't understand how a cookbook is supposed to represent a map, it just doesn't make sense, not even with the additional context of the previous metaphors.
At best it would be somewhat understandable if it said a map can be used for a cookbook, with dish names mapping to recipes, but even this would be a stretch and assume a dish can be made in a single way.
Keep in mind the goal is to teach someone who has zero ideas about datastructures what they are, not to give some analogies to an experienced software engineer.