That depends on how 'fairness' is defined. Your definition of fairness appears to exclude a set of concepts which you see as unfair.
It's not a good rhetorical tactic to cede the concept of fairness; better to argue "that thing being done in the name of fairness, is actually unfair".
I would define fairness as equality of opportunity, for every person.
Hence the previous comment's tautology that fairness will not be an objective good for most people, because (a) most people prefer their own self interest, (b) the status quo provides majorities advantages that minorities do not share, and (c) objective fairness will thus come at the expense of the majority (who are by definition more numerous than the minority).
It's interesting most people are interpreting my comment as a preference, vs an observation.
It's not a good rhetorical tactic to cede the concept of fairness; better to argue "that thing being done in the name of fairness, is actually unfair".