A musician fails to perform a piece hundreds or thousands of times while learning it. A programmer fails to apply a concept many times until they fully understand it. To imply that failure is not normal and not alright is to imply that everybody should be able to perfectly do anything in their life without any prior practice.

Clearly, the word "failure" in this context is insufficient, because we all would agree that some failures are unreasonable and some are an absolutely normal and necessary part of personal growth.

To an extent, why not? When I was child, it was expected of me. I failed in that, but I realise that I'm the only person to blame for it and it means I wasn't intelligent enough.

If it will take me 50x tries to do something and someone else of that same background will do it in 25x, that means I was doing something utterly wrong.

Or they were more naturally inclined than you, or that they had more existing analogous experience than you.

Either way, if your 49 failures were unacceptable, then so we their 24 failures. This conversation was never about comparing ourselves to those who are better or worse, but about the meaning and acceptability of "failure".

words have connotation and failure does not mean mistake.

Failing to perform a piece is not a mistake, it's a failure. The word simply means "an attempt that did not succeed". Failed attempts are a natural part of progress and learning.

I recommend you read the following.

https://thecontentauthority.com/blog/mistake-vs-failure

That article doesn't at all contradict my point.

oh yeah, the article that explains that mistake and failure aren't the same thing doesn't contradict your point that mistake and failure are the same thing.

man, I'm so glad you cleared that up for us...