Re: Very disturbing
No its not. Muhammad was an Occidentalist. The sexualization of that particular event is an Occidentalist reality ignored by Muslims who choose to worship a human being and his hadiths instead of God and his Quran.
Yes it was. The term Occidentalsist (as a rather knee-jerk and out of place response to the proper use of Orientlalist) aside; the sexualization of the event is purely a fabrication done by rather lewd orientalist interpretations, and has nothing to do with humanizing the prophet (saw) but everything to do with demonizing him...at least with respect to victorian standards of decency. In any case, the "occidental" inrerpretation is no doubt the right one here, as it is privy to the exact dynamics of the society in question, and better able to discern the true reason for divorce.
So I'll just echo Sharaabi's point; where the hell did this nightgown business come from anyway? Look to the paragraph above for the answer...