During the week, there was a minor tsunami of opprobrium over comments made by a BBC sports presenter, John Inverdale, on Radio 5.
He had made the following remark about the ladies' singles tournament winner, France's Marion Bartoli.
"Do you think Bartoli's dad told her when she was little, ‘You're never going to be a looker? You'll never be a Sharapova, so you have to be scrappy and fight?'"
When the first waves of outrage starting lapping on Twitter, the BBC was quick to issue an apology: "We accept this was insensitive and for that we apologise."
But that wasn't enough for some commentators. The Guardian's Marina Hyde demanded he be sacked.
"Might I suggest that during Inverdale's opening monologue on day one of the 2014 championships, he is literally removed from the set. Getting the hook, they used to call it in vaudeville, after the practice of physically yanking bad acts off stage with an extended shepherd's crook."
Another flapped: "It is a remark, throwaway or planned, that exposes the wider culture. Sexism and the explicit discussion of the female body is still acceptable; that it exists in the sporting arena, where women thrive because they are strong, is only more offensive."
Was Inverdale insensitive? Yes. Wise? Not on your life. But untruthful? No.
Inverdale was only saying out aloud what a lot of people, men and women, were thinking.
Bartoli is an attractive woman but has a bulkier physique than the model-like "coathanger" frames of some of her rivals.
So it was hardly mean spirited even if he would have been better off keeping his thoughts to himself.
In his indelicate way, he was merely stating a fact: sexual attractiveness gave Maria Sharapova, a beautiful woman, a much easier ride to fame and wealth, even when her tennis wasn't always up to scratch. That she is now one of the richest sportswomen in the world has a lot to do with the way she looks.
Sexual attractiveness is also a huge part of the appeal (and commensurate earning capacity off the court) of men's players such as Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer.
I don't remember Ivan Lendl, a man who would struggle to be called a "looker", raking in enormous amounts of sponsorship dollars in the 1980s even when he was the best men's player in the world. But one of his predecessors Björn Borg, a dashing Swede, did.
Yes, men's winner Andy Murray ain't no oil painting, and Inverdale would have been better served bundling in his observation about Bartoli's physical appearance with a critique of Murray, but he didn't. He was remiss in that respect.
But it's hardly a sacking offence.
Are we to believe every single one of those women who were admonishing Inverdale on Facebook or Twitter for his alleged sexism haven't cooed at one point or another at seeing David Beckham or Rafael Nadal with their shirts off?
No matter the sport, sex sells, whether you're a female or male athlete, and it makes getting to the top a whole lot easier when you don't have to worry where you're next cheque is coming from.
Anna Kournikova, another blonde Russian female tennis player, got deals simply on the basis of her beauty. She never won a WTA singles event but has an estimated net worth of $50 million.
That Bartoli managed to win Wimbledon without the same privileges and advantages Sharapova and Kournikova got because of their looks is a tribute to her talent and determination.
She did it the hard way.
And that's all Inverdale, in an albeit ham-handed fashion, was trying to point out.