OnlyFans Creators Are Pissed That Meta Lets Muse Talk Dirty

Muse is Meta's always-on AI agent, the one that climbed the download charts in its first month on the back of Instagram and Facebook distribution. Meta says adult users of the 18-plus app can have explicit text conversations with it. No images, no video, but X-rated chat is allowed.

Adult creators interviewed by WIRED see a double standard. One New York creator with more than 100,000 Instagram followers says her account is restricted and she is constantly in some report or appeal. Another performer says he is on his seventh Instagram account in five years. Meta's position is that a private one-to-one chat on an adults-only app is a different thing from marketing services on a social platform.

This matters beyond adult content. It is an early test of a question every platform will face: when the machine is allowed to do something the people on the platform are not, who is the rule actually protecting?

We think Meta's distinction is real, and also convenient. A gated, private conversation between a verified adult and software is not the same as a public post that a teenager might scroll past. That is a defensible line, and we'd rather see adult AI live behind an age gate than leak into general feeds.

But the line happens to fall exactly where Meta makes money. Muse keeps users inside a Meta product. Human performers on Instagram are trying to send attention somewhere else. When the policy that protects users also protects revenue, people are right to ask which goal came first. One performer summed up the mood when he pointed out that Meta already built an 18-plus app for its agent but shows no interest in an adults-only space for people.

The harder issue is data. One creator wants to know how Muse was trained and whether anyone was paid. We don't know the answer, and the story doesn't either. Meanwhile the same creators are dealing with hyperrealistic deepfakes they often can't get taken down. That is the downside if this scales: synthetic intimacy gets a polished, sanctioned home, while the humans it resembles get restricted accounts and stolen likenesses.

We're not against AI here. One performer already uses automation to clip videos for social, and says he'd be open to working with a tech company on an AI version of himself that fans could message. That's the useful version: consent, compensation, and the human still in the business. The bad version is a platform that learns from the work, sells the experience, and moderates the workers out.

I'm watching whether Meta writes a clearer policy for human adult creators, or whether the gap just quietly widens as agents get more capable.

Many adult creators lean on X and Bluesky, where explicit content is allowed, while still needing Instagram for visibility. Several trace today's platform caution back to FOSTA-SESTA, the 2018 law that affected Section 230 protections and led many sites to pull back on adult content.