Whats the difference between progressive wave and stationary waves ?

I've always sensed that our description of light as a wave is misleading. I can imagine it ACTUALLY being a progressive wave moving up and down because wouldn't that contradict the very idea of special relativity? Some light would would travel faster than others because not only is there the forward motion at light speed, but also the up and down (or side to side if you prefer) of the wave. Higher frequencies would travel faster to achieve the same speed as slower waves that need not oscillate as frequently.

So the question I ask is are we just calling it a traditional wave because it is simply convenient to do so or because light is, in fact, a wave jumbling back and forth while traveling at the ultimate speed limit across the universe?

Feedback would be helpful. I haven't had the chance to study this more as of yet, so I may, and probably am, overlooking a critical element that would resolve this dilemma.

You get standing waves in signal lines and in some designs of RF filters. They are a real embarrassment in the lines between transmitters and antennae where then can introduce excessively high volts (High Voltage Standing Wave Ratio / VSWR).

A wire dipole, fed at the centre, will present a load of 73ohms at just one frequency. (At which the dipole is an exact half wave long. All the energy is radiated into free space so this 'looks like' a pure resistance. Any practical antenna needs to radiate a range of frequencies (bandwidth) so it cannot be perfectly 'matched' to free space. A very short dipole will appear as a small Capacitance in series with a tiny resistance; that is almost an open circuit. A very long dipole can look like anything from a near open circuit to a near short circuit.
An antenna feeder will always have standing waves in it but these may be reduced by 'matching networks' at the antenna feed point.

I guess it would have to be - as there isn't a negative gravitational field.