Just considers them wrong. It's okay to disagree with something, but there should be an argument to support it. “Furthermore, I condemn them for turning the Equal Protection Clause, indeed the very idea of ​​meritocracy, into a myth, and for declaring that we are all governed by invisible forces (some would call them “stigmas” or “social norms”) , that our nation is built on racist and sexist conspiracies." He disagrees with those who think white privilege influences those who control power, but he doesn't say why, almost as if he expects everyone to agree with his common-sense perspective. Instead, McIntosh uses an argument to legitimize his perspective to his readers. She lists 46 advantages that she can perceive that have been afforded to her by white privilege. Reasons like number 41, "I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not be against me.", number 44, "I can easily find academic courses and institutions that only pay attention to people of my race ." these are advantages that lead her to conclude that “The pressure to avoid it (white privilege) is great, because to face it I have to give up the myth of meritocracy. If these things are true, this is not such a free country; someone's life is not what you make it; many doors open for certain people without virtues of their own." The conclusion that meritocracy, the idea that those who work hard rise to power, is a myth, due to the discrepancy between the opportunities offered to people based on race, to sex, etc.