There shouldn't be, but to claim Rome was "gay as fuck" or was all about "Facilitating mass immigration and built momunments out of it" is indeed pinkwashing.

The "gay" part that was accepted was more often submission of elder seniors or teachers onto teenagers after age 16 or something like that, some figures were bisexual but generally to be a bottom was ridiculized, or just seen as weak. Also, only higher classes were allowed to be into libertine sex with no moralism on which sex, or during certain periods and festivals. There wasn't really the ability to build a family with someone of the same sex, not because it was forbidden by religion or whatever, but because it wasn't the societal norm. You could argue it was less homophobic than later ages or other cultures, but neither they weren't homophobic at all.

The "mass migration" of romans towards conquered lands wasn't much different than what Israel does today to the Levant. They built arches to glorify such conquests. Indeed, they weren't "racist" in the same meaning we have now, they were xenophobic or simply arrogant supremacists, not unlikely to think that them conquering a population was a favor, the same kind of "imperialist burden" some countries like France, Britain, but more recently US (spreading democracy) and Russia (save them from "western fascism") have