The problem with focusing on prevention methods, Valthazar, is that it doesn't help. It's actually far more likely that it causes damage. Upthread, you may have seen a request for hard numbers on prevention tactics. The best example cited showed a 4.2% decrease, with a p-value of 0.9. That's a marginal utility of 0.42% for prevention tactics - minus the harm in enabling victim-blame of the form "Oh, she didn't take preventative measure x, she obviously wanted it." And whether or not it is your intent, anything that puts the onus on the victim to avoid rape rather than on the perpetrator to not rape or the culture to not enable it does enable this victim blaming.
So basically, arguing for more preventative tactics does negligible good and definite harm. Why is this the huge risk-reduction strategy that gets harped on? If your goal is, as you claim, to minimize the harm done, why not focus your energies on victim-blaming, which causes far far far more than a 0.42% shift in underreporting, undercharging, and enabling - and harms male victims too, by heaping social stigma on them (something you claim to be against)?