If you demand of anyone you are in a relationship with that you be their primary, then yes. I can see how it would be unfair to others. After all, you are demanding that each person in their relationships should make you their number 1 priority.
But, there is a large difference between wanting to be someone’s primary, wanting to be in a relationship with them, and demanding that you be someone’s primary.
Being in a primary-relationship is, for one thing, more work. Yes, your “favoritism” is higher, but so is the amount of emotional support you are expected to give. While I can imagine being in many relationships with many different people and being happy, I cannot imagine providing primary-level emotional support to all of those people at once. I’d probably end up doing nothing else and be largely unhappy. So I can’t see myself wanting to be the primary of as many people as I could see myself being happy in relationships with.
Further, it’s easy to see equitable ways for people to give each other non-primary status. Say you have four individuals: Alfred, Betty, Carl, and Diane. Alfred and Betty are each other’s primaries. Carl and Diane are each other’s primaries. Alfred and Carl decide then to enter into a relationship, knowing that neither will be each other’s primary. Neither, in this case, is demanding something they are unwilling to give. There are many other such “stable” scenarios, but frankly, as long as everyone is informed and is happier with the arrangement than they would be without it, I fail to see how your “deontological” concerns come into play.
If you demand of anyone you are in a relationship with that you be their primary, then yes. I can see how it would be unfair to others. After all, you are demanding that each person in their relationships should make you their number 1 priority.
But, there is a large difference between wanting to be someone’s primary, wanting to be in a relationship with them, and demanding that you be someone’s primary.
Being in a primary-relationship is, for one thing, more work. Yes, your “favoritism” is higher, but so is the amount of emotional support you are expected to give. While I can imagine being in many relationships with many different people and being happy, I cannot imagine providing primary-level emotional support to all of those people at once. I’d probably end up doing nothing else and be largely unhappy. So I can’t see myself wanting to be the primary of as many people as I could see myself being happy in relationships with.
Further, it’s easy to see equitable ways for people to give each other non-primary status. Say you have four individuals: Alfred, Betty, Carl, and Diane. Alfred and Betty are each other’s primaries. Carl and Diane are each other’s primaries. Alfred and Carl decide then to enter into a relationship, knowing that neither will be each other’s primary. Neither, in this case, is demanding something they are unwilling to give. There are many other such “stable” scenarios, but frankly, as long as everyone is informed and is happier with the arrangement than they would be without it, I fail to see how your “deontological” concerns come into play.