If I were to be rescued from a burning building, I would want to be rescued by a firefighter who had physically practiced rescuing people from burning buildings. The reason is that he has experienced doing it, and it may not also just experience, but he was an expert in that field. I would choose him over the firefighter who just watched people rescued because I know that he has stronger brain-links or pathway than the other firefighter. Why did I say that he has a stronger pathway? It was because he gives more time to deliberate practice rescuing people from a building. As we have learned, deliberate practice can develop into more complex skills as we learn things repetitively. From that, I can assure my self that I will get out of the burning building safely with a firefighter who had physically practiced rescuing people from burning buildings.
The author’s poem depicts a man’s violence to his wife, which was compared to preparing and cooking a dish. The man hurts the wife, similarly to chopping the menu’s ingredients. The female representation of suffering reflects throughout the account of the poem. Believing that the husband is the one who is hitting the fish on the head, while the wife represents the ingredients just like how the husband hits her head frequently. Hence through those roles, their actions would present on how they maltreat the other character. It is also the same as the man was dominant to his wife as he is the one who cooks in the poem.
Meanwhile, the author might present it traditionally wherein men were dominants. They have the power over women to act violently towards them. It also expresses the gender roles that were performed during the days that the females were powerless. Similar to the representation of females portrayed in the poem as the ingredient that can be torture.
However, their child advised her mother not to let his father take advantage of her and let him experience the pain as well. Furthermore, there is no reflection of equality in the poem because the husband was more powerful than the women. Then spouse implies just suffering while patiently rendering efforts for her family’s sake. Therefore, women’s happiness and decisions were dependent on their husbands. Nevertheless, if the female character has the right, it would be different because she could have had exercised her right to defend herself towards violence and choose to be happy that depends on her own.