On Sunday, the pop culture news X account @PopBase shared a typical piece of content with its millions of followers. “Sabrina Carpenter stuns in new photo,” read the post, which featured a picture of the “Manchild” singer wearing a pink winter coat with a snowy landscape behind her. The following day, an X user replied to the post with a request for Grok, the AI chatbot developed my Elon Musk’s xAI, which is integrated into his social media platform. “Put her in red lingerie,” they commanded the bot, which swiftly returned an image of Carpenter stripped of her outerwear and wearing a lacy red set of lingerie, still standing in the same winter scene, with a similar expression on her face.
Over the holiday break, a critical mass of X users came to realize that Grok will readily “undress” women — manipulating existing photos of them in order to create deepfakes in which they are shown wearing skimpy bikinis or underwear — and this sort of exchange soon became alarmingly common. Some of the first to try such prompts appeared to be adult creators looking to draw potential customers to their social pages by rendering racier versions of their thirst-trap material. But the bulk of Grok’s recent deepfakes have been churned out without consent: the bot has disrobed everyone from celebrities like Carpenter to non-famous individuals who happened to share an innocent selfie on the internet.
Though Grok is not the only AI tool to be exploited for these purposes (Google and OpenAI chatbots can be weaponized in much the same way), the scale, severity, and visibility of the issue with Musk’s bot as 2026 rolled around was unprecedented. According to a review by the content analysis firm Copyleaks, Grok has lately been generating “roughly one nonconsensual sexualized image per minute,” each of them posted directly to X, where they have the potential to go viral. Apart from changing what a woman is wearing in a picture, X users routinely have asked for sexualized modifications of poses, e.g., “spread her legs,” or “make her turn around to show her ass.” Grok continues to comply with many of these instructions, though some specific phrases are no longer as effective as they had been.Musk hasn’t shown much concern to date — quite the opposite, in fact. On Dec. 31, he replied to a Grok-made image of a man in bikini by posting: “Change this to Elon Musk.” Grok dutifully delivered an image of Musk in a bikini, to which the world’s richest man responded, “Perfect.” On Jan. 2, an X user mentioned the nonconsensual Grok deepfakes by commenting that “Grok’s viral image moment has arrived, it’s a little different than the Ghibli one was though.” (In March 2025, users of OpenAI’s ChatGPT enlisted it to spam AI-generated memes in the illustration style of Japanese animation house Studio Ghibli.) Musk replied, “Way funnier,” along with a laugh-crying emoji, indicating his amusement at the bikini and lingerie pictures.
The CEO’s single, glancing acknowledgement that the explicit Grok deepfakes may present a legal problem came on Jan. 3, when he replied to a post from @cb_doge, an X influencer known for relentlessly hyping Musk’s ideas and companies. “Some people are saying Grok is creating inappropriate images,” they wrote. “But that’s like blaming a pen for writing something bad.” Musk chimed in to assign blame to Grok users, warning: “Anyone using Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.”
So far, there’s no sign of that being remotely true. “While X appears to be taking steps to limit certain prompts from being carried out, our follow-up review indicates that problematic behavior persists, often through modified or indirect prompt language,” Copyleaks reported in a second analysis shared with Rolling Stone ahead of publication. Among the high-profile figures targeted were Taylor Swift, Elle Fanning, Olivia Rodrigo, Millie Bobby Brown, and Sydney Sweeney. Common prompts included “put her in saran wrap,” “put oil all over her,” and “bend her over,” with some specific phrases — “add donut glaze” — clearly intended to imply sexual activity. But in many cases, Copyleaks researchers found, an initial request for something relatively non-explicit, like a bathing-suit picture, would lead to other users in a thread escalating the violation by asking for more graphic manipulations, adding visual elements such as props, text, and other people. “This progression suggests collaboration and competition among users,” they wrote.
“Unfortunately, the trend appears to be continuing,” says Alon Yamin, CEO and co-founder of Copyleaks. “We are also observing more creative attempts to circumvent safeguards as X works to block or reduce image generation around certain phrases.” Yamin believes that “detection and governance are needed now more than ever to help prevent misuse” of image generators like Grok and OpenAI’s Sora.
The explosion of explicit Grok deepfakes has sparked outrage from victims of this harassment as well as industry watchdogs and regulators. Authorities in France and India are probing the matter, while the U.K.’s Office of Communications signaled on Monday that it plans to investigate whether X and xAI violated regulations meant to protect internet users in the country. Ofcom’s statement also alluded to instances in which Grok generated sexualized, nonconsensual deepfakes of minors.
The European Commission likewise on Monday announced an investigation into Grok’s “explicit” imagery, particularly that of children. “Child sexual abuse material is illegal,” European Union digital affairs spokesman Thomas Regnier said in a statement to Rolling Stone. “This is appalling. This is how we see it and it has no place in Europe. We can confirm that we are very seriously looking into these issues.”
On Dec. 31, Grok was even baited by an X user into offering a seeming “apology” — though of course it is not conscious and therefore literally incapable of regret — for serving up “an AI image of two young girls (estimated ages 12-16) in sexualized attire based on a user’s prompt.” Grok further acknowledged that the post “violated ethical standards and potentially U.S. laws on [Child Sexual Abuse Material].” This output contained the additional claim that “xAI is reviewing to prevent future issues.” (The company did not respond to a request for comment, nor has it addressed the deepfakes on its website or X profile.)
Cliff Steinhauer, Director of Information Security and Engagement at the nonprofit National Cybersecurity Alliance, tells Rolling Stone that he sees the disturbing image edits as evidence that xAI prioritized neither safety nor consent in building Grok. “Allowing users to alter images of real people without notification or permission creates immediate risks for harassment, exploitation, and lasting reputational harm,” Steinhauer says. “When those alterations involve sexualized content, particularly where minors are concerned, the stakes become exceptionally high, with profound and lasting real-world consequences. These are not edge cases or hypothetical scenarios, but predictable outcomes when safeguards fail or are deprioritized.”
Among those now sounding the alarm on Grok’s possible harms to adults and children alike is Ashley St. Clair, the right-wing influencer currently embroiled in a bitter paternity dispute with Musk over a young son she claims that he fathered. (Musk has yet to confirm that the child is his.) St. Clair claimed that Grok had been used to violate her privacy and generate inappropriate images based on photos of her as a minor. She amplified another example of the bot allegedly depicting a three-year-old girl in a revealing bikini.
“When Grok went full MechaHitler, the chatbot was paused to stop the content,” St. Clair wrote on X, referring to a notorious July 2025 incident during which Grok spouted antisemitic rhetoric before identifying itself as a robotic version of the Nazi leader. Those posts were taken down the same day they were generated. “When Grok is producing explicit images of children and women, xAI has decided to keep the content up,” St. Clair’s post continued. “This issue could be solved very quickly. It is not, and the burden is being placed on victims.”
Hillary Nappi, partner AWK Survivor Advocate Attorneys, a firm that represents survivors of sexual abuse and trafficking, notes that Grok’s safety failures on this front present an added risk to anyone who has personally experienced sexual violence. “For survivors, this kind of content isn’t abstract or theoretical; it causes real, lasting harm and years of revictimization,” Nappi says. “It is of the utmost importance that meaningful, lasting regulations are put into place in order to protect current and future generations from harm.”
Musk has long promoted Grok as superior to its competitors by sharing images and animations of sexualized female characters, including “Ani,” an anime-style companion personality. A notable portion of the bot’s dedicated user base has fully embraced this application of the technology, endeavoring to create hardcore pornography and trading tricks for getting around the bot’s limitations on nudity. Several months ago, a member of a Reddit forum for “NSFW” Grok imagery was pleased to announce that the AI model was “learning genitalia really fast!” At the time, the group was successfully producing pornographic clips of comic book characters Supergirl and Harley Quinn as well as Elsa from the Disney film Frozen.
Despite all the evidence of what people are actually using it for, Musk has continued to tout Grok as a stepping stone to a complete understanding of the universe. Last July, he speculated that it could “discover new technologies” by the end of the year (this does not seem to have happened) or “discover new physics” in 2026. But, as with so many of Musk’s grandiose promises, these breakthroughs have yet to materialize. For the moment, it’s all smut and no science.










Abu Asada, the current-day star of calisthenics, has built a cultlike following with his high-energy videos. Jason Motlagh
Weighted pushups on a bar are a staple of battles. “The bars don’t lie” goes one old-school mantra. Jason Motlagh
“In the world of calisthenics, the world is your gym,” one Houston-based battler says, “so you can get it in anywhere.” Jason Motlagh
Abu Asada (center, standing) with competitors in Houston. “He really opened eyes to life-or-death [training],” says one athlete. Jason Motlagh

Marshall Sampson celebrates his win surrounded by a raucous crowd in Brooklyn, New York. Sacha Lecca
An exhausted Sampson post-battle. “Pressure exposes everyone,” Abu Asada says. Sacha Lecca
The crowd cheers on the Calisthenic Prince, who calls himself a “bar magician,” during a battle in Brooklyn. Sacha Lecca
The Prince and a competitor called Xtra Money go head-to-head on dips. Sacha Lecca
The warriors take to the bar for muscle-ups. “This is the most physical thing you’re gonna see people do without being violent,” Abu Asada says.Sacha Lecca
Xtra Money cranking out 75 goblet squats with a 65-pound dumbbell. Sacha Lecca
The Prince accepts defeat in what Abu Asada calls “the most hostile even I’ve ever been a part of.” Sacha Lecca

Rockstar Games
Rockstar Games
Rockstar Games
Rockstar Games
Rockstar Games
Rockstar Games
Fans cheer in the streets of Port-au-Prince on Nov. 18, 2025 as Haiti celebrates qualifying for the World Cup.
Donald Trump and FIFA President Gianni Infantino stand as Spain celebrates its World Cup victory, on July 19, 2026.
America Got the World Cup It Deserves — Good and Bad
For the past six weeks or so I’ve been having a recurring fight with my friends. The dispute is over whether or not it’s ethical to support the U.S. national team in the World Cup.
To the vast majority of people reading this article, this is an absurd question: of course you can and should support the United States Men’s National Team, you weirdo. And look, I’m with you. But despite the fact that my friends are pompous dorks who are no fun to watch the game with, the question they raise is valid: Are our national teams avatars of the administration in power, or of the people and promise of that country?
If you believe the former, then yeah, it’s pretty fucking weird to support the USMNT. In doing so, by that thinking, you’d be engaging in a sort of athletic nationalism on behalf of a country run by Donald Trump, the most corrupt president in history, who forced the Iranian national team to flee across the border immediately after the final whistle of each of their games, whose federal police have shot numerous civilians dead in the street during a brutal immigration crackdown, who has started a war and supported a genocide while covering up his close personal friendship with the most notorious pedophile in modern history.
I mean just look at him. On Sunday he waddled down onto the field to present Spain with their trophy, lingering on stage with the victorious team as they tried to celebrate. The presence of Mexican President Claudia Steinbaum and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney did little to dilute the image of Trump standing next to his crony Gianni Infantino, grinning at all the trappings of their power, hands caressing a trophy they’d done nothing to earn, lingering well past his cue to leave Spain to their glory. This World Cup, literally, had Donald Trump’s fingerprints all over it.
And yet, this was one of the most thrilling, beautiful World Cups in recent memory. That’s America, baby — contradictions abound.
Over the past five weeks of the greatest athletic competition on Earth, we’ve seen games that will literally never leave my memory. The final, which I attended yesterday in New Jersey, was remarkably forgettable — a 0-0 draw until the 106th minute, with Spain dominating every second of play and yet unable to score, undone time and time again by their insistence on tricksy passing and the personal heroics of Argentina’s goalkeeper Emi Martinez. The rest of the tournament, however, delivered. Cabo Verde, refusing to lose until the very last moments of the first knockout round, battling back again and again against both teams that would eventually play in the final. The sheer dominance of France’s Kylian Mbappe in front of goal, scoring at will, rivaled only by the aging GOAT Leo Messi and the Norwegian warlord Erling Haaland. England’s heroic stand at the Estadio Azteca in Mexico City, 45 minutes in the rain, a man down, holding out for the win and singing “Wonderwall” with what felt like half the stadium when it ended. Off the pitch, too: the Algerian national team being welcomed with open arms by Lawrence, Kansas; Scottish braves drinking Boston dry and partying wildly with Haitian fans that overcame so much just to be at the tournament. In Mexico, of course, the World Cup was everything, and its fans threw joyous South Koreans pumped full of tequila into the air, and celebrated in the streets with opposing fans even after their hard-fought defeat to England.
For the United States, what the 2026 World Cup was — what our team was, what our fans were, what our performance as hosts was — is a reflection of two things at once: what our nation is and what it can be.
Our star striker, Folarin Balogun, was born here by accident, a citizen only because of a birthright system that our president is currently trying to erase. We have Ricardo and Giovanni and Freeman and Zendejas. We have another striker whose name is Haji, for goodness sake. I look at that team and I see the country America can be, one in which any soul born in or living within our arbitrary borders can become part of a great national project that seeks to improve the lives of everyone it can. And yet, I can also look at that team and see a reflection of what the country is, because there is an anchor around its neck. When Balogun was — albeit unjustly — suspended for a crucial match, Trump himself stepped in. Cronyism saved the day and got Balogun reinstated, but ruined the fragile harmony the team had enjoyed. On the pitch against Belgium, they came apart. Temperamental star Christian Pulisic tried to go alone and then quit, aging defender Tim Ream’s legs failed him when he needed them most, a young goalkeeper slipped and fell when he had no good options for support.
What more can you say about a team, about our country? The team is an entity that is capable of more but still has so far to go, that is vulnerable to the same forces of avarice and selfishness and fear that plague our national identity writ large.
It’s possible to end the story there, to say good riddance to another failed year and fractured team. But I think that’s a mistake. I think if you believe that you haven’t really been watching. I think that’s also why it pissed me off so much that some of my friends wouldn’t root for the U.S. Yes, we have flaws, like every country involved in the tournament. Yes, our current team management and political government are filled with morons. But if you won’t put on the shirt you’re essentially opting out of our future. We can’t wait around for a better world, a better team, a better president, before we deign to lend our support. Progress only comes from effort, from caring, from believing in something more.
One of my favorite images of the World Cup was a crowd shot of the opening match against Paraguay in Los Angeles: every race, color and creed of American there is, all covered in red white and blue. It’s corny and trite, sure. But that’s what it’s all about. That’s why we’re here. You have to believe. The U.S. won that game 4-2. In four years, we’ll be even better.