I don't think either point is necessarily contradictory. To note that 60s era Trek is not something that would be regarded, in relative terms, as progressive today (if it were exactly as it was and just coming out now) as it was considered over half a century ago does not negate its contextual progressivism. Nor does noting it would not be viewed as "cutting edge progressive" today denude it of its progressive qualities. One can make the same argument about Broken Arrow (1950), a western considered quite progressive in its day (though perhaps a touch more so than it deserved--much like TOS) but one that, if released as a new film today, would not be viewed as such, save in isolated moments. The changes in perspectives over time about progressive notions form the core of the assignment I give to my students with that film (and could easily apply to TOS compared to modern expectations as well). I grew up with TOS as well (a bit later than you, I was six in 1973, when I first started watching TOS), and I'm an historian who frequently teaches American history, so I'm familiar with the point of view you're describing. But context does matter--and TOS, as is, would NOT be viewed as "progressive" nearly to the degree today (as something new) as it was when it was actually new. To acknowledge that point is not to be dismissive of TOS.