We recently received a new magazine at our home. This publication featured Matt Schaub on the cover and indicated an interview was inside.

Intrigued, we opened it and flipped through the magazine. Personally, I’m embarrassed I took this action. I quickly realized that this was a “men’s interest” magazine.

What gave it away? The article on Lamborghini’s or the one on how to tie your tuxedo tie certainly tipped me off. But, alas, it was the pictures of scantily clad women that truly helped me understand.

As I flipped through it, I found an article on a Playboy Playmate from Port Lavaca. The accompanying full page color picture of her with very limited clothing and garter belt certainly was my final realization that this magazine was clearly designed for the male spectrum. And if I wasn’t convinced, the article on how to pick up women in grocery stores would have been the final assurance.

Examining it more closely, I noted that it was addressed to my husband. I next decided to figure out where this magazine originated. A quick glance at the “Editor” indicated that this slick, glossy magazine was a publication of our local home town paper, the Houston Chronicle.

Really? I know I have mentioned that I have a 10 year old son. Fortunately, the adults in the household picked up the magazine first and the kid did not see the enticing Matt Schaub cover. I assure you that I would not have wanted him to see the portrayal of females in this magazine. He has no business reading about Playboy Playmates at his age and certainly not seeing their pictures.

I can understand that the Chronicle needs to sell more ads as they struggle to sustain their business model. I don’t understand why women have to be objectified to do so.

By the way, we cannot find any information on this publication on the Chronicle website and I want to tell them not to send it to my home – ever again! We don’t view women as objects and we have a son too young to read or be exposed to this material.

Ah, the pains of our ever-changing media environment!