All arguments from evil turn on gratuitous evil – i.e. an evil from which no good can result. Suppose there are such evils. It certainly seems to follow that some evil could force you to say your life is meaningless. Were this not so, then any evil you experienced could be an integral part of a meaningful life, and so would have meaning and purpose in light of that narrative. You could take pride in how you faced it, how you stuck to or turned back to your principles, how you didn’t despair, etc.
A gratuitous evil appears to be one which would be impossible to face with courage or to endure with patience. After all, these evils are gratuitous: it’s not as if they could be an integral part to the exercise of a virtue. So either there are no gratuitous evils or human beings are unable to experience them, and either way we appear to have a blessed life.
Much is made of the problem of animal suffering, but I see no reason why the same line of argument doesn’t extend to them. If evil is not the sort of thing that can deprive my life of meaning, why assume that it has the power to render an antelope’s life meaningless? But if any experienced evil can be an integral part of a meaningful life, then how could it be gratuitous?