Copyright in the image belongs to the creator of the image.† It is only when the image itself is of a copyrighted work that copyright law comes into place (since the photo is essentially a reproduction of a protected work). You can't copyright yourself, so you can't invoke copyright law here.
I should add that you can copyright a costume/character, and that you may have the right to control images of yourself in character under copyright law. That is not the same as you just being you—or you being an ass, either, for that matter, unless you are being a copyrightable ass (you know, of the Disney type).
However, there are privacy laws, libel law and personal image rights covered under existing tort law that you may be able to invoke. It's not simply a matter of issuing a take-down notice, though—you have to be able to show that either the photograph itself violated a reasonable expectation of privacy, or that it has caused actual damage (to your business or reputation).
By the way, copyright is a moral right that exists from the moment of creation, and filing/registering of copyright is unnecessary (though it does make ownership and violation more easily provable). Simply claiming copyright or adding a circle-c (or equivalent) is enough of a legal declaration of intent to reserve rights on publication.
As always in such matters, you really need to get legal advice, and I'm just a photographer, not a lawyer. But if you are a "sufficiently public" figure and the content is not actually libellous, there may be nothing you can do.
† As I posted earlier today in an edit to an older Canadian copyright question, Bill C-11 had the effect of repealing section 13(2) of the Copyright Act, which only ever gave copyright to the subject of a picture if the subject had commissioned and paid for the picture.