It applies to those who are doing a thing that others are doing as well. Implicit in that is a sort of standard. Hence, there is a group of peers (wanted or unwanted) to compare efforts and results with.
Most Aikido teachers I know and respect from around the world discuss certain people as rather unique for various reasons. Sometimes being considered unique is the highest form of flattery, others times it is severely dismissive, and derogatory of someones thoughts and efforts.
George, has made some interesting observations about certain peoples opinions on spiritual matters being as valuable as their successful movements and abilities.
It is a simple thing really. Some people want to be unique and think they are advanced. Your peers, and testing, tends to put you in your place and give you a reality check on what you thought you know and can actually do to and among peers in a group.
So a peer is someone doing what you are doing. In the dictionary all definitions are about equal so actually it implies equal. That's also the meaning of it's root too. So someone of equal quality or ability etc.
There is another definition which relates to birth and rank like a duke, marquis, earl, count. So I doubt you mean that one although you may slip in that rank bit which would thus be wrong.
Nothing about standards though, sounds like an additive to me. A separate thing. Unless we are talking someone of equal standard being a peer.
So there are peers, people doing similar to me. We share the same goals and activity. That loosely makes us a kind of group.
Someone training to shoot targets, a sportsman, would thus have peers too. Yet someone training to shoot people, say a soldier or even a hitman, would be doing similar activity yet would be a different group, specifically yet generally the same group. Are they peers? Their goals are different, their reasons are different, their whole mentality is different.
Techniques are different too.
Are you my peer?
So the point is meeting peers is natural and we all do it. Meeting others is a different subject.
Being part of an organizational set approach to doing things is yet another subject. Those in it must follow that approach.
You definitely are unique so your reference to such seems like you are projecting some false view on me.
Nothing wrong with unique actually but the relationship to superiority or delusion is thus again misplaced I would say.
So I would say your peers are those who do internal arts i/p and i/s from a similar view to yours. Otherwise they are not your peers. They are something else.
So that's how I see it.
I've always trained and been tested by peers as has most everyone really.