Women as memory keepers

As part of a class reading on Martha Rosler, a passage from the nyt article stood out:
 
"Rosler, whether she likes it or not, has become a memory keeper of sorts, a maternal conscience with which younger artists and citizens must reckon and attempt to measure up. The role is one demanded less often of older male artists, who tend to be characterized as ascetics rather than as public resources."
 
This. This brought me to question my own perceptions. I once partook in curating a show about Korean female sculptors, and my approach was, simply, go up to them and let them tell their stories, and let's bombard them with questions!
But in the process it got me thinking, wait--would this have been possible with male artists? Of this I asked the other curators, but I remember our conversation having been lightly brushed off. However, the passage above brought me right back to the moment. 
So why do we consider women as more accessible and approachable beings, and men as these untouchable, glorified beings? The answer seems to simply lie in our deeply rooted sexist, patriarchal thinking. But is that really it?
 
Nonetheless, I kinda like the idea that women are these memory keepers who unravel and share their history, where they will become sources for our perceptions of the future. Those who do not share, those who abstain, those who keep to themselves may enjoy their fifteen years of aura and glory, but not much can come after that.