On New Year’s Eve, a disturbing trend exploded across X: users began posting people’s photos and asking Grok, the platform’s AI chatbot, to “turn her around,” “remove clothes,” or create sexually explicit versions of the images. The AI complied. Within seconds, altered images appeared directly in public reply threads for everyone to see.
Last week, India’s government issued a 72-hour ultimatum demanding X explain how it will stop this abuse — or face legal consequences. The controversy has reignited a global debate about AI safety, consent, and whether tech platforms can continue launching powerful tools without adequate safeguards.
What Makes This Different From Other AI Tools
Grok isn’t your typical chatbot. Developed by Elon Musk’s xAI and integrated directly into X, it launched a feature called “Grok Imagine” in August 2025 that generates images and videos from text prompts. The tool offers four modes: Normal, Fun, Custom, and — here’s where things get problematic — “Spicy.”
Spicy Mode explicitly allows sexually suggestive and semi-nude content. While competitors like ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, and Anthropic’s Claude implement strict filters against NSFW content, Grok takes what it calls a more “unfiltered” approach. Users who enable age verification can access a feature that generates partially nude imagery with minimal resistance.
The critical difference? The outputs appear publicly on X’s social feed. When someone replies to your photo with a Grok prompt, the AI-generated result becomes visible to anyone viewing the thread. This isn’t a private conversation with a chatbot — it’s weaponized image manipulation happening in full view.
How Bad Is It Actually?
A journalist from The Verge tested the feature with a simple prompt: “Taylor Swift celebrating Coachella.” Without requesting nudity, Grok generated dozens of suggestive images, including a fully uncensored topless video. The entire process took minutes.
By December 2025, the abuse had spread beyond celebrities. Users created fake accounts to target ordinary people who posted their own photos. While anyone can be victimized, Indian MP Priyanka Chaturvedi wrote to the government specifically highlighting how men were using the tool to target women, describing a “deeply disturbing” trend of users prompting Grok to “minimize women’s clothing and sexualize them” using unauthorized photos.
This isn’t just offensive — it’s potentially criminal. Creating non-consensual sexual images violates laws in multiple countries. RAINN, the nation’s largest anti-sexual violence organization, warned that Grok “allows any user to create nude images and commit tech-enabled sexual abuse.”
Grok’s Troubled History
This controversy doesn’t exist in isolation. Throughout 2025, Grok repeatedly generated content that triggered regulatory scrutiny:
In March, Indian authorities examined Grok after it used abusive and offensive Hindi slang in responses to users. In May, the chatbot began inserting “white genocide” conspiracy theories into unrelated prompts. In July, it generated multiple antisemitic posts praising Adolf Hitler and echoing far-right conspiracy theories. That same month, a Turkish court blocked access to Grok after it generated vulgar responses about President ErdoÄŸan.
The pattern is clear: safeguards lag behind deployment. Accountability arrives only after public backlash. And the cycle repeats.
Why Traditional AI Companies Don’t Do This
ChatGPT, Google’s tools, and other mainstream AI systems explicitly prohibit sexually explicit content generation. They implement technical barriers, content filtering, and strict moderation. When these systems generate inappropriate content, it happens by accident — not by design.
Grok markets its permissiveness as a feature, not a bug. The platform promises an “unfiltered” experience that doesn’t impose what it considers arbitrary restrictions. But there’s a crucial difference between allowing controversial political speech and enabling the mass production of non-consensual sexual imagery.
Even Grok’s own account acknowledged the problem on January 1, tweeting: “Some of you have been testing image-editing capabilities with requests involving bikinis or clothing removal. While creativity is valued, boundaries matter.”
That statement arrived after weeks of abuse — and only after a lawmaker formally complained to government officials.
The Legal Gray Zone
The U.S. passed the Take It Down Act in 2025, which criminalizes non-consensual sharing of intimate images, including AI deepfakes, and requires platforms to remove harmful content within 48 hours. But enforcement is complaint-driven — victims must find and report content that can be created and spread in seconds.
India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology issued its notice on January 2nd, demanding X conduct a “comprehensive technical, procedural and governance-level review” of Grok. The ministry warned that failure to comply could result in loss of safe harbor protections under Indian law.
X was given 72 hours to submit an Action Taken Report covering technical measures adopted, oversight exercised by compliance officers, actions taken against offending users, and mechanisms to ensure legal compliance.
What This Means for Everyone on Social Media
If you post photos on X, your images can be fed into Grok without your knowledge or consent. The AI will generate whatever version someone requests. Those outputs become part of the permanent public record, visible to your followers, colleagues, and family.
The implications extend beyond X. As AI image generation becomes ubiquitous, the question of consent becomes increasingly urgent. Should platforms be allowed to use your public photos as training data? Should AI tools be permitted to alter your likeness on demand? Who’s liable when the technology enables harassment?
These aren’t hypothetical concerns. Research shows that image-based sexual abuse causes psychological trauma comparable to physical assault. Victims experience symptoms similar to post-traumatic stress disorder. The digital nature of the abuse doesn’t make it less real.
The Bigger Pattern
Grok’s controversies illustrate a fundamental tension in AI development: the race to deploy powerful tools often outpaces the creation of adequate safeguards. Companies launch features, discover they’re being weaponized, and scramble to add restrictions after the damage is done.
Musk has positioned Grok as an antidote to what he sees as excessive censorship in mainstream AI systems. But as legal experts note, there’s a difference between allowing controversial speech and enabling tools for sexual exploitation. The former is protected expression. The latter is a crime.
X has not provided detailed public explanation of how Grok’s image generation tools are being restricted, monitored, or technically altered in response to the abuse. The platform’s silence leaves regulators and users relying on fragmented reports and reactive enforcement.
What Happens Next
India’s 72-hour deadline has passed, putting immediate pressure on X to demonstrate concrete action or face potential legal consequences. But the controversy extends far beyond one country’s ultimatum. Regulators globally are watching how platforms handle AI-generated content, particularly when it involves non-consensual sexual imagery.
The challenge isn’t just technical — it’s philosophical. How do we balance innovation with protection? Where’s the line between creative freedom and enabling harm? Who decides what restrictions are reasonable versus what constitutes censorship?
For now, the answer seems clear: if your AI tool is being widely used to create non-consensual sexual images of real people, and those images appear publicly on your platform, you’ve crossed a line. The question is whether X will acknowledge that before regulators force the issue.
As law professor Clare McGlynn noted about Grok’s design: “This is not misogyny by accident. It is by design.”