What if Ham's sin was sexual?

Having read a number of commentaries now I have found that some people think Ham's sin was sexual. "he looked upon his father's nakedness" is apparently used else where in the bible to describe the sexual act. It is also argued that the reason Noah knew what had happened the next day was because of the evidence of rape. Whether or not these assumptions are correct I still feel the previous post was broadly accurate. We can still contrast God's response to sin in Genesis 3 with Ham's response here. In both stories the guilty end up naked. God stepped in to cover and protect, Ham took advantage of another man's weakness. If we dare to compare our own response to sin with God's what does it reveal?