Earlier this year, a minor teen male was "stressed out and embarrassed" because his former girlfriend pasted his image all over Google, under such unloving messages such as "I can't read"; that rocker Kenny Loggins "is my saviour"; that he's working in the gym "on my two pack"; that he's "every man's prison dream"; that he's gay. Another talks about his "dick" and another about cybersex. He comes in for further ridicule with an assessment of his fashion sense: "V-necks. Mom jeans."
The newspapers printed his name, his picture, and some of the cruel slogans (some couldn't be printed in a family newspaper). It was all over the web, and it was generally given the lighthearted treatment about "a woman scorned" and about how he shouldn't have messed with a woman who has internet capabilities. See, e.g., http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1354432/Hell-hath-fury-Girl-gets-revenge-ex-boyfriend-spamming-Google-image.html
Funny, isn't it, to humiliate a young man on the world's leading search engine. And nobody can do a damn thing about it, except chuckle at his predicament.
Compare that treatment to this story in the news today: "A New Mexico man's decision to lash out with a billboard ad saying his ex-girlfriend had an abortion against his wishes has touched off a legal debate over free speech and privacy rights." http://beta.news.yahoo.com/jilted-ex-boyfriend-puts-abortion-billboard-194142831.html Read the whole thing.
That has triggered a debate about the Constitution. The AP won't even name her.
Down, down, down the rabbit hole we go. A teen boy is allowed to be skewered because he apparently angered his ex-girlfriend. But a man isn't allowed to announce that, against his wishes, a woman aborted the child, or would-be child, he fathered. She has total control over whether his child is born, and he's not even allowed to exercise his First Amendment right to speak up about it.
I don't even recognize this country any more.