Masculine dominance and feminine surrender

It's interesting that the dictionary gives rather different shades of meaning to the words ‘violent and ‘violence.’ Here are some meanings of ‘violent’: Marked by, acting with, or resulting from great force; extreme, and/or marked by intensity; moving or acting with physical strength; urged or impelled with force; excited by strong feeling or passion; forcible; vehement, impetuous, fierce, furious, severe. Hmmm, most of that sounds to me like it's quite applicable to a dominant relationship, i.e., masculine dominance and feminine surrender. It's all about passionate, forceful intensity, which seems like a good thing to me.

But here's some of what they say about ‘violence’: Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing: ‘crimes of violence’; abusive or unjust exercise of power; assault, injury or abuse; transgression or oppression. Hmm, well that doesn't sound too good at all, does it? That's not about passion at all, but about injury, damage, and abuse. There is some overlap between the two definitions, and I've exaggerated the differences here, to make a point. But the question is, why should there be any difference at all, between ‘violent’ and ‘violence’ – which are just the adjective form and the noun form of the same concept?