How can two distinct normative agendas, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and Women, Peace and Security (WPS), be mutually advanced to deliver tangible benefit to raise women’s participation in conflict prevention at the state, regional and international level? In previous analysis of this relationship we, (Davies and Teitt, 2012) and Hewitt (2016), have argued for R2P and WPS to ‘talk’ more to each other. This chapter expands on the need to identify shared meaning and approach of R2P and WPS in the area of women’s human rights protection and women’s participation in mass atrocity prevention. We explore alternative sites to address prevention and protection gaps through human rights instruments, such as the Human Rights Council, and member states reporting obligations, for instance the Universal Periodic Review and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Discussions of R2P and WPS need to go beyond the boundaries of the Security Council. Furthermore, we consider how shared advocacy for a women’s rights protection focus as an atrocity-prevention measure may be promoted, even normalized, in post-conflict peace processes. To illustrate this, we examine the single case study of the Nepal peace process and the early warning activities of women’s civil society within that country to promote the normalization of conflict prevention. Our aim in this chapter is to identify opportunities for the two agendas to create normative consensus on the prioritization of preventing conflict, preventing atrocities and preventing gender discrimination. These factors are essential to achieve protection.