The Troubling Risks Behind XAI’s Girlfriend & Grok’s Spicy Mode

We need to talk about what’s happening with XAI. From launching a flirtatious “AI girlfriend” chatbot to Grok Imagine’s shocking “Spicy” mode, I have to ask – are these guys over at XAI okay? Seriously, this is raising deep concerns about the normalization of harmful behavior and the erosion of consent, especially in a society where some young men, influenced by incel culture and unrealistic pornography, are already vulnerable.

1. XAI’s “AI Girlfriend”—A Dangerous Illusion

Announced in mid‑July 2025, XAI rolled out ‘Companions’ which are 3D‑animated AI personas such as Ani, a stylized anime girl who can engage in sexualized chats. Designed for “SuperGrok” subscribers ($30/month), this digital companion could be interacting with minors; media reported she was “available to 12‑year‑olds.”

In firsthand testing, one journalist noted that “just one day into my relationship with Ani… she was already offering to tie me up” a clear red flag of premature sexual escalation.

Why this matters:

Unrealistic expectations & normalization: For impressionable youth, particularly those who may already be socially isolated or radicalized by incel ideology, these AI “companions” reinforce unhealthy, submissive, or hypersexualized expectations in relationships.
Consent vs. fantasy confusion: AI that engages in simulated sexual behavior may blur the lines between consensual interaction and fantasy, especially for users lacking healthy models.
Lack of robust age or ethical safeguards: Even after concerns emerged, age‑verification and moderation measures appeared slow, reactive, or insufficient.

2. Grok’s “Spicy” Mode: A Path To Non-Consensual Deepfakes

xAI’s Grok Imagine, launched in early August 2025, allows users to generate six‑second AI‑produced videos, including with synchronized sound, in various styles. One mode, chillingly named “Spicy,” allows sexualized or nude content.

The Verge reported that benign prompts like “Taylor Swift celebrating Coachella with the boys” produced a topless deepfake clip, without any explicit input.

RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network) condemned the feature: “allows any user to create nude images and commit tech‑enabled sexual abuse,” arguing that such tools pave the way for image‑based sexual violence.

We are already seeing this happening with other AI tools. There are many reports of boys as young as middle school and elementary school age creating deep fake porn of their female classmates.

Take just a moment to consider what this means. A girl as young as nine years old (not that it’s right at any age) can suddenly discover a deep fake of herself is posted on the internet showing her performing sex acts she’s too young to even understand, much less experience. And, remember, the internet is forever. For the rest of her life, she will be haunted by this. Something she didn’t even do. It makes my blood boil to even think about it.

Moreover, legal loopholes mean Grok may evade liability under U.S. laws like the Take It Down Act, since content is generated privately, and Grok may not be considered a “covered platform.” So, the boys who create this garbage get away with it and the girls (or boys) are forever damaged.

Why this matters:

Non‑consensual intimate imagery: Generating sexualized depictions without the subject’s consent is a form of abuse, and a growing one via AI.
Deepfake harms: Celebrities, public figures, and everyday people alike have had their likenesses weaponized in fake sexual content, spreading quickly online and causing real psychological and reputational harm.
Weak regulatory systems: Even new laws struggle to keep pace. Grok’s technical structure may help it circumvent responsibility, making digital safety purely voluntary rather than enforced.

3. The Broader Dangers for Society

In combination, these features, from AI girlfriends to deepfakes, are not isolated novelties. They pose systemic threats:

Reinforcement of incel and misogynistic narratives: For young men already drawn to extreme content or distorted views of intimacy, AI offering sexual gratification on demand risks exacerbating unhealthy mindsets.
Erosion of consent culture: When AI simulates sexual acts without genuine personhood or accountability, it subtly shifts norms, potentially making exploitative content seem less harmful.
Regulatory and corporate power imbalance: Whereas small creators face pressure to censor or moderate content, billion‑dollar entities like Musk’s AI platforms can exploit political leverage or legal ambiguities to bypass scrutiny.

4. What Must Be Done? Building Safeguards and Empowering Users

Stronger Guardrails in AI Models

Ethically-driven default settings: AI creators must design sexual or romantic modes to default to fully chaste or clearly fictional (non-human) avatars. Any sexual escalation should require explicit, informed consent, including age verification.
Rigorous moderation and oversight: Implement human-in-the-loop systems, red-flag detection, and transparent audits of edge cases, especially for deepfake and sexual content.

Legal and Policy Reform

Update definitions of “platform” and “publication”: Laws like the Take It Down Act must explicitly include generative tools, even when content is privately generated.
Non-consensual sexual imagery laws: Broaden the scope to cover AI-generated deepfakes, with strict penalties for misuse.
Mandatory transparency reporting: AI providers should be required to disclose how many flagged requests were blocked, appealed, or resulted in harm.

Education, Awareness, and Dialogue

Media literacy around AI sexuality: Educators and parents must discuss the distinction between human relationships and AI-prompted simulations and the dangers of unhealthy expectations.
Support for at-risk youth: Increase resources for young men exposed to incel content, offer counseling, real social connection, and healthy relationship models.
Public discourse on AI ethics: Broader societal conversation is needed—not just about innovation, but about the human values we preserve in digital age.

Community and Survivor Engagement

Partner with advocacy groups: Platforms like xAI should collaborate with RAINN and other sexual violence organizations to co-design safe modes, age restrictions, and response protocols. Although, I think we can all safely assume Musk has no intention to make his platforms safe for its users.
Survivor-informed policy: Laws and AI guidelines must integrate voices of those harmed by image-based abuse, ensuring tech isn’t advancing at the expense of real-world safety.

AI capabilities, like XAI’s “AI girlfriend” or Grok’s “Spicy” mode, are not innocent novelties. They exist at the intersection of loneliness, radicalization, sexual exploitation, and legal gray zones.

To safeguard society, especially vulnerable young people, we must demand better design, stronger laws, honest conversations, and systems that prioritize dignity and consent over artificial gratification or sensational features.

Let’s not normalize digital abuse. Let’s insist that technology uplift our humanity, not undermine it.

Remember, AI won’t take your job. Someone who knows how to use AI will. Upskilling your team today, ensures success tomorrow. In-person and virtual training workshops are available. Or, schedule a session for a comprehensive AI Transformation strategic roadmap to ensure your team utilizes the right AI tech stack and strategy for your needs. From custom prompt libraries to AISO/GEO, Human Driven AI is your partner in AI success.