I simply think that there's a difference between "there are sapient beings who are as a species irredeemably evil as a function of their species" and "there are bad guys that you don't have to feel bad about fighting and killing." I fully support the idea of bad guys being bad and good guys being good, with some complexity thrown in for variety. I won't argue that always assuming monstrous races are an analogy for oppressed minorities isn't the way to go about things. I just also don't think that "sapient species that can be written off as murder fodder" is the only alternative. And that being the norm for so long ends up being just as inane and dull. I'm all about vanquishing monsters. Killing owlbears and evil cults, overthrowing evil empires and slaying wicked witches and evil warlocks? Bring all that on! the Darkspawn from Dragon Age? Oh yeah, I can kill those all day. Same with the myriad monsters in The Witcher games, or the various demons and devils in Pathfinder. I love villains who are unappologetically evil and wicked, and do their thing with glee and not a shred of remorse. Those guys are fun and killing them are absolutely my preferred type of escapism. And none of it requires assuming that a sapient race is just evil. You can even still have a race be the antagonists because that's what their culture, leadership, etc leads them to being.
