In her theory of Backlash, Susan Faludi's describes it as a "powerful counterassault" that aims to reverse progress.
Her usage is entirely political and can be applied far beyond the women's rights movement.
Backlash to equality.
To multiculturalism.
To workers' rights.
And countless other forms of social change that have upset established hierarchies.
But the word's etymology is physical -
It was first recorded in the early 19th century to describe the sudden jolt caused by friction or looseness within a machine's gears.
Both definitions do important work.
Because when a backlash occurs socially - it disrupts the machinery we rely on to turn ideals into action.
The machinery of governments.
Of institutions.
Courts.
And democracy itself.
Power becomes more concentrated.
Programs are wound back.
Rights are overturned.
And voices are silenced or drowned out as a result.
Throughout our history, every advance towards gender equality has prompted backlash.
As suffragists won the vote, they faced fierce and sometimes violent opposition.
The second-wave feminists who fought for equal pay and reproductive rights were warned their place was in the home, and that their bodies were a matter for the state.
For decades, female MPs were treated as intruders, not equals - enduring everything from casual sexism to outright assault within the walls of Parliament.
And when Julia Gillard became the first woman to hold this nation's highest office, she faced a relentless campaign of misogyny that found its bluntest expression in three words:
'Ditch the witch.'
In every example, women put themselves on the line to push society forward.
Momentum has never been smooth or consistent - but I think we'd all agree the fight has been worth it.
I'm now a member of Australia's first ever female-majority caucus and cabinet, thanks to organisations like Emily's List.
And real change is taking place as a result.
We're now ranked 8th in the world on gender equality, after backsliding to 50th under the former Coalition government.
We've achieved the lowest gender pay gap on record - while changing our laws to deliver better pay for the care work that has long been undervalued.
We've made historic investments into women's health - from 33 Medicare Endometriosis and Pelvic pain clinics to better access to reproductive health and menopause treatments.
And we've expanded paid parental leave to 26 weeks.
But while progress looks different these days - given women are increasingly at the table, rather than outside the room - so too does the backlash.
The fight for gender equality has always been met with hostility in some corners of our communities, that is not new.
Having the most hateful sentiments towards us amplified on an industrial scale is though.
For female representatives across party lines, weathering a constant barrage of online abuse is now considered part of the job.
Our faces and bodies are treated as fair game for deepfake pornography.
Misogynistic slurs and rape threats riddle our feeds.
And our professional success is held up as proof that men are being unfairly passed over.
But while all these sentiments could be swatted away as fringe ideas propagated by faceless trolls -
There is no longer anything fringe about hating women, given the teachings and charlatans of the so-called Manosphere now influence both politics and policy.
Just as there is nothing virtual about online violence.
Nine in 10 female politicians in this country experience persistent abuse or intimidation for daring to participate in our democracy -
The sheer volume is so relentless, that almost 81% are self-censoring as a result.
And their fears are, sadly, entirely warranted.
In the last year alone, at least half a dozen men have been arrested or charged for making threats against women in state or federal parliaments.
I know, because I was one of their targets.
My colleague Anika Wells - who received an email from a man promising to kill not only her, but her three children under the age of 10 - was another.
I think we like to tell ourselves that the political violence we see abroad could never happen here.
That an MP could never be bludgeoned to death in her home or shot in the street - as was the case in the tragic killings of Ann Widdicombe and Jo Cox.
Or that the social media influencers advocating for male primacy to be restored "at all costs" will never sway the majority of voters.
But ignoring the worst-case scenario won't diminish either risk.
Instead, we need politicians of all backgrounds and the organisations like Emily's List, that underpin our democracy, to fight back.
I believe the starting point is understanding the scope of the challenges ahead and the different roles each of us will have to play to meet them.
Right now, we have a new public square that is feeding billions of people a steady diet of outrage.
It monetises hate, fuels conflict and spreads the kind of disinformation that changes electoral outcomes.
One of the most popular genres in this grievance economy, is the idea that men are the oppressed sex, and that their fears, insecurities and failures are the fault of women.
It's a narrative that far-right leaders, both here and abroad, are hellbent on exploiting -
There's a reason the Kremlin's propaganda arm started churning out fake videos of women attacking men in public, right as the MeToo movement peaked in influence.
Or that Nigel Farage applauds Andrew Tate as an "important voice" for "the emasculated."
Just as there's a reason Pauline Hanson is now trying to restrict abortion access, frame domestic violence a "two-way street" and declare men "the most oppressed minority in Australia."
That's because the politics of grievance thrives on division - manufactured in troll farms if necessary.
And the leaders harnessing it would rather scapegoat women, than come up with any clear vision of an equal future.
This convergence between mainstream politics and the manosphere extends far beyond the conservative conferences people like Jordan Peterson and Tony Abbott rub shoulders at.
And it's already having devastating impacts.
A recent Ipsos poll found 57 per cent of Gen Z men across 29 countries think women's equality "discriminates against them".
While University of Melbourne research shows that misogyny, not race, class, or nationalism, is the single strongest predictor of violent extremism in young Australians
- with almost a quarter of our boys' now believing feminism is so damaging to society, that it should be "resisted with violence if necessary".
When faced with that reality, the response of progressives can't be to simply criticise Andrew Tate.
Instead, we have to acknowledge that while the problems men and boys are facing aren't caused by women - they are in fact real problems.
A crucial part of our job is to offer better solutions and an alternative sense of belonging for the sake of everyone's shared safety.
That work is largely structural:
We know that the politics of fear feeds off an absence of hope - which is why it's so important that we build a future people have a stake in.
That means delivering more affordable homes, a fairer tax system, secure jobs with decent pay and an economy where opportunity is shared.
While holding platforms accountable for the harm their products inflict and the hate they spread - as we're doing through our Digital Duty of Care.
But it also has a clear cultural element.
One that requires everyone who cares about protecting progress in this country, to actively push back against the idea that gender-equality is a zero-sum game.
And to do it in a way that is hopeful and positive, not narky or punitive.
I realise all of this can feel like rewarding a tantrum, given women's advancement seeks to rectify centuries of patriarchy and male entitlement still claims lives - on average one a week.
To borrow Julia's words though "we've got to be analytical about our obvious inability to take young men with us" on the journey to sell the shared benefits of gender equality -
Because the cost of failure is too high.
Changing the current trajectory and creating a new kind of discourse capable of finding broader appeal, won't happen overnight.
It will require more of the many many men who back gender equality and live it every day to demonstrate its myriad benefits, both in their own lives and across society -
While making it their business to speak out against misogyny.
And for all of us to do more to ensure that the women sticking their head above the parapet aren't punished for having the courage to do so.
That is why we need organisations like Emily's List now more than ever.
Your work has already given girls across this country a chance to see themselves reflected in their leaders.
But backlash serves as a constant reminder that progress is rarely self-sustaining -
The wonderful Justice Mary Gaudron whom we lost recently, captured that reality in one piercing sentence:
"We won equal pay in 1967. We won it again in 1969, 1972 and 74. Yet we still don't have it."
Emily's List still exists today not because women like me need convincing that we belong in Parliament.
It exists for the young organiser deciding whether she can survive her first campaign.
Or the single mum wondering if the cost of running outweighs the benefits of winning.
The next phase of this fight will demand that we be more deliberate about protecting and supporting the next generation of women prepared to lead it.
That means building enough love, safety and encouragement in our real-world networks, so that anyone who decides to run has a foundation of support to fall back on.
Because as Joan Kirner understood: "No woman in politics can survive and be successful without a network."
It means protecting our own before it's too late - something we collectively failed to do for Julia.
And crucially, ensuring progressives remain disciplined in our messaging and unwavering in our goals.
All of that will require us to acknowledge the challenges facing men and boys, while pushing back on the lie that women are responsible for them.
It will require us to demonstrate the universal benefits of gender equality -
Such as greater financial flexibility for families, a more rewarding balance of work and caring, safer communities, and the freedom for everyone to live beyond the constraints of sexist stereotypes.
Finally, it will require us to respond to new waves of backlash with a politics rooted in hope, not hatred.
I know we can get there - because of the women in this room, and your predecessors who moved mountains to give me and so many of my colleagues a seat at the table.
The history of Emily's List shows us that people are persuadable.
That women from all backgrounds in this country can overcome incredible odds if they have a formidable team beside them.
That when we work together, we win.
And that the fight isn't over until every woman's place in this world is determined by her competence and ambition, not the forces seeking to silence her.
Thank you.
