I have a bit of a situation with my #thesis in that one of the examiners has been... a bit off and I'm trying to determine whether it extends far enough to be considered biased.

The thesis looks at explanatory gaps in language and affirming self-description among non-binary people. I conducted a survey online to gather data.

Some comments from the 2nd examiner are unfair, some just plain wrong.

e.g. one of her complaints is that I shouldn't have allowed #trans or #transgender as options for participants to select under a question about identity because, according to her, trans and transgender are exclusively binary identities.

Which is wrong. Very wrong.

This is one of the items my #supervisor and I sought clarification over. The examiner just quoted #SOC8 at us, which in no way supports her assertions (in fact it supports me) so I have no idea what she's playing at.

She has marked the whole thing as if it were a #LifeSciences paper when it's a #humanities paper. She's asking for, basically, a complete rewrite.

The first examiner had a couple of perfectly reasonable minor corrections. My supervisor has given good feedback throughout. I don't know whether I can #appeal the #MajorCorrections decision on the basis this 2nd examiner held some #bias.

Any #academics #researchers #examiners for #pgr #mres #phd who could offer any #advice, it would be hugely appreciated. I can share further examples from the marking document if needed. A viva is not part of the process, fyi.