The distinction between "sons of God" and Jesus as the "Son of God" was made by Jesus himself in John 10:34ff. It doesn't invalidate the similarity of the language.
In John 1:1 the word/Jesus is called "θεός" not " υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ". In John 10 the Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to be "θεός". I've dealt with this claim before, and you haven't added anything new here. You've just given more assertions that don't address what I've said.
I am not relegating Jesus to being one of the "sons of God" in Ps 82:6.
Ok. I never claimed you have.
He has special status as the "son of God" originated from heaven, but it doesn't invalidate the comparability of the terminology,
The terminology doesn't fit for the reasons I've already given.
nor does it lead to any usurpation of the Father's status as "o theos" in his own right to the exclusion of the Logos (cf. Jn 1:1b).
"o theos" is not an exclusive reference to "the Father", so no "usurpation" is involved. John called the word/Jesus "theos" and "o theos" in his Gospel. You just don't like the implications.
You are still simply making assertions, so I'll point you in the right direction. You've claimed that a particular definition is what the text requires, but it doesn't seem to fit the context of John 1:1 and John 20:28. Why do you think this definition fits the context in these passages better than "God"? Also, you have not did not cleared up your problem with the terms "deity" and "God".