I hope we all can at least agree on the second point : that far more people understand the term Era of Progress, 1875-1965 than do they the term Era of Modernity 1875-1965.
Now onto the first point.
All the many and varied postmodern -isms have at least one key element in common : they involve hitherto verboten mixing.
Be it of high and low (say in art) or normal and abnormal (say in sexual cum civil rights) or central/official/dominant or local/periphery/subculture (as in imperial/hegemony relationships).
I used high and low as my first example deliberately because the Era of Modernity was also the era of Social Darwin defined Progress.
Deductive Progress : absolute universals in an absolutely closed universe yielded absolutely correct results
Everything and everyone was slotted in one universal and eternal vertical hierarchy.
In/out, normal/abnormal etc were really just variants of the all important high/low distinction in worth.