Something I was wondering, watching the George fight last night...a few of the major tropes seemed to be a) an overly effeminate vanity, b) a reluctance to lock up or otherwise engage in "honest" wrestling, c) a savage anger after he's been hit. The result is most unscientific in terms of wrestling, someone who either avoids violence or engages in it overly emotionally.
I've seen these tropes elsewhere in popular culture, and I'm sure you all have as well. Every step plays into audience response. The vanity is associated with pride, smugness, wealth, etc., all elements that help build an effective villain (though I wonder to what extend the effeminacy was, at the time, associated with homosexuality). The reluctance to get in the trenches and wrestle like a commoner exacerbates this, while also implying a kind of cowardice underlying the superiority complex--the Dell article touched on this. The angry, emotional response to a successful hit is the payoff, when the bad guy's cool, prideful exterior breaks and the cool, tactical hero makes a fool out of him by reducing him to a an angry animal. It's a great bit, and all the pieces fit together nicely.
What I'm wondering is the effeminacy that sets up the first part of the equation. Specifically, do any of the female wrestlers follow this model? Female wrestlers are already in a largely uncoded space in terms of gender, and I'm not sure vanity has the same degree of negative associations when applied to a sex that is often stereotypically assumed to be vain by default. On a larger scale, it might be a contradiction in terms to describe a woman as "effeminate." Then again, it might be entirely appropriate for a female wrestler.
In short, I have no clue. What do you guys think?