Dora the explorer?
I understand your question, but it's almost impossile to separate the effects of socialisation in arguments like these. There have been real-life adventurous women in periods when they would have been generally looked at aghast, and it's hard to guess how many others there would have been if society hadn't been against such things.
I would also question whether there are any modern male fictional characters with no more motivation than "lust for adventure". All characters these days need more than that.
Except that not everyone has this "nurturing instinct", if such a thing exists separate from social roles. I hated dolls as a child and never had any burning desire to have children.
I think it's more accurate to say that in societies without birth control, women's lives tend to be bounded by pregnancy and child-rearing, which makes "adventuresome" behaviour impractical. If the society is also strongly patriarchal (e.g. most Western cultures, where women had fewer legal rights than men), there is a lot of cultural pressure for women to conform to the role of wife and mother, so few will develop that independent spirit required for a fantasy protagonist.
It requires more thought to make a realistic female character in these circumstances - I know, because I've done it.
I have no kids, though I have a basic idea of Dora's character.
Does the instinct, if it exists, arise from the physique, or is it the opposite? I freely admit being old-fashioned, and that I have no problem with women who, being thrust into situations not of their own choosing, take on whatever roles are necessary.
One manga/anime title character is Sapphire, who, while a female, because of a prank by an angel, was born with both male & female
hearts. She is a princess who is proclaimed a prince, & reared as such, though she also receives the standard training for a princess. There is an evil duke who wants his half-wit son on the throne, & as the kingdom denies it to women, is out to prove Sapphire is really a girl.
Complications arise when God sends the angel to Earth to retrieve the boy's heart, because he is forced to do so, when Sapphire most needs it; for she is dueling with Sir Nylon who is the Duke's henchman.
This story gives girls both adventure that is usually reserved for the boys' comics, & the fancy dresses, etc., that appealed to girls. But it clearly makes Sapphire as a girl weak, though benefiting from the male strength of the boys' heart. She initially finds the woman's role distasteful, & much prefers the man's role. But, after the angel coerces her into wearing a beautiful dress, & attending a dance, her desires for the man's role slip away, especially after she dances with the prince from the neighboring kingdom.
I think that the modern 'feminism' may have arisen, in part, from abusive husbands who denigrated the role of women. They saw themselves as kings of their households, and their wives as mere concubines or slaves. Admittedly, motherhood
is a burden, but until recently, life itself was also a burden. Since the men earned the wages, they felt they alone should have control/authority. I understand that the older cultures placed women in the submissive roles. I, for one view the Genesis Adam & Eve story as an allegory for childhood innocence & coming of age; though either way, it apparently places women in the inferior role. As an allegory, it only gives an explanation for the way society was, but as history, it demands things be that way.
Clearly, the man wants a son to inherit his name, wealth, & title, if he has any. The woman, being literally the property of her father, has little if any say in whom her husband will be. I read an autobiography of 3 generations of Chinese women. I think it was called
WILD SWANS; anyway, the oldest generation, the grandmother was given away as a concubine for the hoped political-social advancement of her father. To him, she was nothing but a commodity, to be spent as he pleased. Her happiness was not even a factor.
If things had been fair, the women should impose demands on her husband to be, & the law would enforce them. He gets his son, but must also give his own share. But, history indicates that might = right.
I think it takes a lot of strength to be a mother. Especially when the culture seems to denigrate the role. Here, in the USA, the kids of Mexican immigrants will soon out number the citizens whose grandparents etc. were born here, because the wealthy seem to regard parenting as an undesirable thing, but the immigrants are having 5 or 6 kids per family, perhaps strict Catholicism or poor education accounts for this.
It seems to me, that if a person was trained to be a smithy, or a physicist, he should not prefer being a miner or a historian. Here I go, putting my head on the block, there are roles for which men are better equipped than women, just as the role of child bearing & rearing is especially suited to women. Men can only watch the special intimacy that mothers have with their children. I know there are plenty of women who resent this role, or at least have no interest in it. 1 of the actresses who portrayed CATWOMAN in the 1960s BATMAN put off motherhood until she was in her 40s. She gave birth to a half-wit son; perhaps not entirely because she waited so long, but that certainly was a factor. Whether she had all along intended to delay motherhood or avoid it altogether, I know not.
I do not know much about male characters, offhand, but real-life men do things like climbing mountains simply because they are there. I also know there have been a few women mountain climbers, though.
I should have kept this much shorter, & fear this post may be a bit confusing.
