Mary Said "let it be onto me" and then he angel departed. So, she consented. It could not have been otherwise.
Her work was the rearing of Christ, to her He was ovedient; Him she encouraged to begin His work of miracles; Him she followed around; Him she saw flogged and dying at the Cross; to her He gave us as children.
It is true that possibly other women likewise lived a life ot total dedication to their sons, saw them die an agonizing death and assumed responsibilities for their followers afterwards. However, we have one Lord Jesus Christ, and one Mary His blessed mother.
Leaving aside any sort of "direct" action of God, there's the way kids affect their parents. I had the privilege and blessing of being the "primary care giver" of the 'orrible brat child (hereinafter OBC). And she was deathly ill and needed lots of care. And then when she started getting better the delerium of happiness and fun can scarcely be described. Whatever your theology is, I hope it's strong, because it will need to deal with the fact that more than once I, moiself, was cast as the Theotokos in little plays the OBC put on. And spent happy hours doing the shopping while lugging her around in the baby backpack in the supermarket and giving a running commentary on what I was doing, while people looked at me as though I was a few fries short of a happy meal.
The OBC changed me. Attentiveness to the OBC changed me. And my point is, imagine that the OBC was God the Son of God. How much did that change our Lady?
Hint: A LOT!
The other issue is that God seems to like delegating. I see more and more that there is the issue of monotheism and the number of ways to be monotheistic. And some of us think that any homage given to any saint is somehow an attack on God's not only being Prime, but also being, well, God.
I wonder, does God NEED a Bible?
And Joseph??? Didn't he do anything???
It was through Joseph God instructed him to go to Egypt and to tell him when he should return to Israel-not Mary. One would think that if "rearing of Christ" was Mary's responsibility, then God would have communicated it to her. Had Mary been a bit more proactive, she would have had our Lord change the water to wine prior to the wedding, not after running out of wine. Sure she followed Christ around but our Lord equated her to the same level as everyone else and while she was at the cruxifition so were others. Christ didn't give us to her as children; rather He gave her to John to physically look after her.
What makes you think that Christ needed encouragement to begin performing miracles, or that Mary even did that? Isn't it interesting that about the ONLY thing we are told about His childhood was that Mary did not yet believe?:
Luke 2:48-50 : 48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you." 49 "Why were you searching for me?" he asked. "Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?" 50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.
In addition, I can't believe you are seriously suggesting (if you are) that John 2:3 counts as Mary encouraging Jesus to perform a miracle. :) Mary says: "They have no more wine." That's it. It is pure invention to suggest that this meant Mary was encouraging Jesus to wave His hands and produce some from thin air. Biblically, we have no idea if Mary "got it" at this point.