It's a pain, but it's the reality that we're stuck with. If you go out of your way to hide failure or burn yourself out trying to never fail, how is that better? What's a realistic alternative to accepting that you're human and might make mistakes, and accepting that some places are simply too dysfunctional to be able to handle it?
That's really not the point. The whole point is that it's not possible to know with any degree of certainty whether a given position will have more or less tolerance towards mistakes. That can be determined by anyone in your organization, from CEOs to your own team members, and certainly that's not advertised by recruiters. It's something that you can only tell after you're already onboard and head-first into your job. And then what? are you going resign and job-hop to yet another unknown? That itself burns through a lot of goodwill, as you're trading your escape from potential burnout for a limited chance of avoiding that issue attached to a resume that labels you as unreliable and finicky.
It matters nothing if anyone claims that making mistakes is human nature. What it really matters is whether your organization employs people who weaponize mistakes. Another fact of human nature is personal ambition, and there are far too many people who don't mind throwing others under the bus to use them as stepping stones in their career paths. Some of those types succeed, others try until they succeed. What's your answer for that?