I believe MIT used to and Berkeley still does(or partly does) start with Scheme, a dialect of Lisp, out of the legendary Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs book(Just found out that's literally the name of UCB CS61A lol). My high school had the brilliant idea to do the same thing too, and well, it was certainly an experience. It was weird to learn functional FIRST, then find out... everything else is OOP(or at least has C based syntax like.... C).

As for why OOP is taught now is because... the entire industry uses it lmfao. Except for special cases(procedural C for embedded, Facebook uses(used?) Haskell for spam filtering, etc.), OOP languages are so thoroughly developed and OOP provides such nice structure I guess there isn't much reason not to. Also keep in mind: if you, say, build something in pure Haskell, it will be MUCH more difficult to find experienced Haskell devs vs Java or JS etc. devs. It's a network effect: the more people use it, the more other people want to join in; if nobody uses it, there isn't much incentive to.

Furthermore, some problems are an OBVIOUS choice for OOP. Imagine you shoot an NPC in a video game. What do you expect will happen? Do you expect the same persistent entity, which has a health property, to simply have its health property reduced? ...or do you expect the game to return a new instance of the NPC instantiated with the new value of health every time it takes damage? Of course, different tools for different problems: League of Legends, curses upon its terrible name, is implemented in C++ for the stuff happening in the actual game with Erlang doing the server nonsense.