Here's the quote:
“I was married, but that didn’t matter, either. She seemed to consider things like age and income and family to be of the same a priori order as shoe size and vocal pitch and the shape of one’s fingernails.”
So, I do understand that this quote is an example of parallelism, but is she comparing (in a one-to-one sense) the importance/unimportance of age to shoe size, and income to vocal pitch, and family to 'the shape of one's fingernails'? Is that what 'a priori order' means, in this context?
Or does the quote imply that everything listed has the same significance? For eg: age is as significant as family, which is as significant as vocal pitch and shoe size, which is as significant as fingernail shape and income; that they (family, vocal pitch, income, shoe size, age, fingernail shape) are all as significant as each other.