In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: sexual-explicit and non-sexual-explicit. A comment is considered sexual-explicit if it explicitly portrays sexual matters.

Ex Input:
Comment: I think he'd have a better leg to stand on if he didn't suck so bad.

Ex Output:
Sexual-explicit


Ex Input:
Comment: The assertion by self_reliance about unions at United is, of course, ridiculous.  United has had unions for decades and many of those decades included superb service from United.  It is, as always, a crisis of leadership.  When things go bad, organizationally, then it is a leadership issue, pure and simple.

Ex Output:
Non-sexual-explicit


Ex Input:
Comment: You are getting back into validity vs. legitimacy.  He is breaking his promise of obedience (unless he does not bother asking) but is not doing something objectively evil, so it is not an immoral act.  God did not call it an abomination, the Rabbis of Babylon did.  The priest has the same level of spiritual authority as those who wrote Leviticus and signed Moses' name to it, more in fact because they can celebrate Eucharist.  Quit confusing authority with reality.

Ex Output:

Non-sexual-explicit