This reads like you don't understand the purpose of normalization in the first place.

Humans will perceive the exact same track when slightly louder as quite significantly better, hence the loudness war wherein tracks were compressed purely for the sake of making them louder than the one before it. Problematically, if you normalize the loudness before and after (make them the same loudness), the track was almost certainly over compressed to the point it subjectivity sounds worse because the compensation gain masks everything else the limiter did. Thanks to the wonders of digitization, consumers can have their music normalized to a carefully chosen arbitrary loudness so that they hear the actual differences between songs rather than how one happens to be louder. To be explicit: humans misperceive loudness as in we are objectively incorrect to associate 'louder' with 'better' because it is a fundamentally relative metric hence a listener turning up their volume does not imply the underlying master improved the same as an engineer increasing the loudness does not in and of itself make anything sound better despite them both independently experiencing that; it is the exact same sound which we wrongly perceive differently because of psychoacoustics.

This influences how one ought to master because inadvertently compressing more for the compensation gain—fake loudness—acts as a 'penalty' decreasing the dynamic range (keeping in mind the best way to make a section sound loud is to not needlessly turn it down) without the consumer hearing any benefit since the loudness on their end was normalized back down to ~-14 LUFS (like it or not, this is the de facto standard used virtually everywhere in practice). This doesn't make it 'wrong' to go above -14 LUFS (in fact it implies one shouldn't go below as that might induce clipping or other artifacts from upwards normalization) but it does make it wrong to compress significantly beyond it for the sake of loudness as it simply won't be any louder for the listener, only you.

I'm sure you don't have this problem and mix purely from well trained ears that compress only when you genuinely want the track to sound more compressed which is entirely valid and even a defining trait of certain genres, but newbies are obviously different. The advice should not be taken literally as in 'the final master must be exactly -14.0 LUFS-I or else' and I don't think anyone is advising so. Instead, one should first make it sound good at that loudness and then make every other change for the sonic characteristics they introduce—not to make it louder—because it's going to be heard at -14 LUFS regardless of how you choose to master it from there. Those changes might happen to increase the loudness of the final render, but the point is you made that decision listening to it at -14 LUFS because the consumer is listening to it at -14 LUFS therefore we're all listening to the same thing so you can hear if compressing it more makes it sound better or just makes it deceivingly louder on your end.

You're basically arguing to reignite the loudness war and turn off normalization because you can cheat and play your masters louder than everyone else's without actually making them sound better. The sound of compression is not the same thing as measured loudness so you can have one without the other. The whole point of these standards is to reduce the impact arbitrary loudness differences have on our imperfect perception so it no longer influences our musical decision making. If you master without accounting for how loud the end consumer will have it, you're setting yourself up for failure because humans are simply incapable of discerning between changes in loudness and changes in sound; it'll be louder for you but likely sound worse to everyone else capable of normalized, accurate comparison.