The problem with this explanation is that if curiosity were such a disadvantage to the community, it would be reviled in men as well as women. And since the survival of our in-built curiosity suggests that it's adaptive, there must surely have been more instances where everyone benefitted from curiosity ("I wonder what happens if I put these inedible olives in brine for a year? Oh!") than suffered from it.

I am reminded irresistibly of a chapter on ethics in sociolinguistics, where the author referred to a case where an anthropologist published a picture of an Australian aboriginal tribe's sacred objects. It was forbidden for women to see these, and when a copy of the book ended up in the hands of an aboriginal schoolgirl, the men demanded she be killed. This in turn reminds me of the chapter in The Bullerby Children, where the boys keep some sacred and powerful magical artefacts in a cigar case and won't let the girls see them, on the grounds that they're inferior. The girls naturally aren't having any of this and eventually find a way to sneak a peek, only to discover that the awesome artefacts are merely a couple of the boys' milk teeth. Their laughter completely spoils the magic, as far as the boys are concerned. I can't help thinking that herein lies the answer - men are afraid that if the women are curious enough to sneak a peek behind the curtain of authority and superiority, they will laugh at them, and all their power will be gone. Hence much social instruction is aimed at curtailing this dangerous trait.

That's my explanation, anyway ;-)