Apparently someone on Twitter in the last couple of days kicked off a round of the perennial "Violence Bad?" discourse, and I don't remember seeing anyone explicitly go "You know, this is cropping up in the same environment as the perennial 'Sex Bad?' and 'All Fiction Without Clear-Cut Morality Play Digestible By Toddler Bad?' discourses and maybe that's not, y'know, a coincidence?" so that's me saying it, right there.
Anyway. Violence in RPGs is there because it's a drama engine. Nobody needs explained to them how violence can drive the drama of a game. The conceptual suspension of disbelief is really fuckin' low.
And unlike most things, you can model violence extremely sloppily and abstractly, with little care and attention to verisimilitude, and not only will nobody care, that actively makes the game better, because the thing is: nobody actually wants your TTRPG to evoke real violence at the table.
Which is also the exact set of points that helps sink that perennial companion piece, "What If TTRPGs Were About Romance Instead?" because modelling deep social relationships is hard and if that's what you make your game about, modelling them badly makes the game worse. If you make the game about that, people want it to evoke that.
(Also, as far as the "what if more SEX in TTRPGs?" people go: a lot of the time people don't want to evoke that at the table because people are generally selective about who we want to evoke that with at all. Which is not to knock those games which do it, or those people who play with people they do want to evoke it with, but "abstracted-swordfight drama" is a massively easier sell to Random Gaming People than "hot-fuck drama"!)