Interesting discussion Andy. My mom was the archivist of our family as well, we have dozens of photo albums that she put together through the years. However, I was probably the only one who ever looked at them. She was/is also the one who frames pictures for use around the house. But now that digital has arrived, the only thing she knows how to do is put the photos from her camera onto the computer. She doesn't know how to put those photos on disk, or to a digital photo frame, or even how to get the photos printed at Walmart. My dad is even worse when it comes to this stuff (he has no interest in computers). So the number of photos being "archived" in any way is really small. The only time photos get printed is when I go home and print them (and possibly frame them as well). I did a Blurb book of my nephews for them because I wanted them to have photos in some hardcopy form and my brother/sister-in-law live in a digital-only household. I don't know if gender has anything to do with archiving, because I'm the only one in my family doing anything -- and that has to do with my interest in photography and photos in general.
Even though this is a personal anecdote, I think it illustrates that when things are easy (drop off film, pick up negatives and prints) it's quite easy to archive because the materials are right there. I know that for many photographers that digital has given them more control over the process, but for the regular point-and-shooters, I think it must be overwhelming -- have to (but probably don't) deal with colour (and other kinds of) correction, cropping/aspect ratios, choosing paper/inks, etc. It's too much work and probably easier just to keep things on the computer, or on sites like Flickr. And although I think (?) that scrapbooking is still popular, I think that it's being replaced by print-on-demand books, which is a much more gender-neutral method of archiving.