This paper aims to offer an understanding of how (intersectional) bias in student evaluations of teaching affects academics' mental health and career progression. Despite the widespread acceptance of student evaluations, an emerging stream of research has begun to highlight the biases and prejudices that underpin much of data collection when it comes to student evaluation surveys both in terms of who completes the evaluation and also in terms of who is being evaluated. While most studies provide analyses of students' comments and illustrate the abuse that is directed at (marginalised) academics, very little research has focused on the impact of this process on academics. This study offers an overview of academics' experiences with student evaluations by drawing on an intersectional analysis of 17 interviews with academics employed in UK Business Schools. The findings illustrate the detrimental impact of student evaluations on academics' mental health and career progression. This study also shows how institutional pressures to keep students happy impact academics' wellbeing and teaching approaches.