Perhaps it is because none of these things are actually paradoxes, but have only been declared so by people who have toxic agendas. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/30/t-magazine/dolly-parton.html?action=click&module=Editors%20Picks&pgtype=Homepage

Two of the three "paradoxes" are patriarchal bullshit, of course. But there's an argument that "authenticity" is, as well, since the myth of the Authentic Artist is imagined as male, and artists that either are women or have female audiences tend to be viewed as inauthentic.

The most obvious example, of course, being how the Beatles became more "authentic" as their audience became more male. But the whole rockist vs. poptimism debate has always had a deeply gendered (and racist and homophobic) aspect to it.

Authenticity is a trap, however. What is considered "authentic" (male, straight, humbly dressed) is also a performance. Bruce Springsteen or Bob Dylan craft their images with the same care as Beyoncé. All credit to Dolly Parton for seeing this clearly way back in the 60s.

Indeed, Parton has often made variations of the argument that it would have been less authentic for her to dress down to fit this constructed image of the humble folk singer, because what her heart wants is glamour.