How is this example special, compared to the general notion:
F = (\x -> Z (x x))
Y f = (\x -> f (x x)) (\x -> f (x x))
Y Z = F F
so, any set F that is defined in terms of how sets (functions) relate to themselves, fits into the Y combinator. Which is expected, since Y is the essence of recursion.
I don't know that there's anything special about Russell's paradox in particular, to be honest. It has obvious historical importance, obviously, but I doubt that's what you're looking for.
There's something a bit remarkable about how trivial it is, I suppose. Booleans are very simple types, if you'll give me those, and then Not is the only involution!
