The material cannot be used for any other purpose without further permission of the publisher and is for private use only.There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.

While psycho-medical understandings of 'eating disorders' draw distinctions between those who 'have'/'do not have' eating disorders, feminist poststructuralist researchers argue that these detract from political/socio-cultural conditions that invoke problematic eating and embodied subjectivities. Using poststructuralist discourse analysis, we examine young women's talk around food and eating, in particular, the negotiation of tensions arising from derogating aspects of hetero-normative femininities, while accounting for own 'feminine' practices (e.g. 'dieting') and subjectivities. Analysis suggested that eating/dieting was accounted for by drawing upon neo-liberalist discourses around individual choice; however, these may obscure gendered, classed and racialized power relations operating in local and wider contexts.

Despite persuasive arguments pertaining to the importance of social class in the shaping of human life, this has and continues to be neglected within psychological research. Using primarily a UK focus, we begin by outlining some of the ways in which ‘mainstream’ psychology typically conceptualises class (e.g. socio‐economic status) and argue that such an approach has a number of detrimental implications, for example, neglecting structural inequalities and oppression and ‘othering’ the working class. We then present a selection of ‘critical’ and feminist‐informed research on social class which, we argue, offers a more holistic and sophisticated understanding of class and, in particular, draws attention to the complexities involved in how people experience, understand and construct class, classed identities and class transitions. Further, such work provides insight into the many ways in which people reproduce, re‐work and resist classed discourse in everyday contexts such as the home, work place and beyond. However, we acknowledge the need for investigation into how those with more economic power justify class privilege and discursively protect and maintain their status.

Recent 'obesity' preventions focus heavily on children, widely regarded as the future of society. The National Child Measurement Programme (NCMP) is a flagship government programme in England that annually measures the Body Mass Index (BMI) of children in Reception (aged 4-5) and Year 6 (aged 10-11) in order to identify 'at risk' children and offer advice to parents. Using Foucauldian discourse analysis this study explores how discourses within the programme construct fatness. The NCMP materials contain three key interrelated themes (concerning the hidden threat of 'obesity', the burden of 'obesity', and bodies that pose a greater risk) that combine to construct a 'grotesque discourse' of apocalyptic public health. 'Obesity' is constructed as a social and economic catastrophe where certain bodies pose a greater threat than others. We argue that this discourse has the potential to change health service policy in markedly regressive ways that will disproportionately impact working-class, Black, Asian, and mixed race families. Introduction: children, BMI, and biopower Recent decades have seen globally increasing media and medical concern over a socalled 'obesity epidemic', particularly among children (Hilton et al., 2012; Ogden et al.,

‘There are some circumstances where, for example, in a talk to a support group there is a risk of revealing your identity through a combination of apparently innocent details − such as a job title, a rare diagnosis, age group and family status’ (Participant Information Sheet; see, Branney et al., 2017)