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.

Comment: During the day I believe he went to prospective houses where he hoped to harm individuals, knocking on doors during the day where he asked for work.  He is an admitted liar.  He is manipulative producing his penciled writing.  It may be the cover story.  He is definitely a thug perhaps for political purposes.  He may not be who he presents himself at all.  He may just be an operative of some type perhaps a paid assassin.  How would you like him showing up at your door with your family there - while you are at work.  He may have.  Not buying his penciled story.  He is an admitted liar among other qualities.  He no doubt has his admirers and cohorts in various interests.  The one's he and his associates have not "mentioned".  Gullible reporting?  What's his military record?  I don't believe his story.  He is a bad character for sure.
Non-sexual-explicit

Comment: Ya know, I gotta say, I don't find it much comfort to hear that "well, other denominations are losing adherents too."  (As bad as the "well, other people abuse children too" with the implication that the hierarchy is somehow excused from the abuse and cover-up.)  The overall drift away from Catholicism and other Christian denominations suggests a bigger overall problem.  Christianity began and grew in the midst of a decadent secular Roman society, so frankly, it's not society's fault.  I can't help thinking too many supposed Christian leaders have become too wrapped up in trying to dominate society with secular power rather than leading by spiritual example.
Non-sexual-explicit

Comment: The author quotes a professor who states  "police reluctance to work with feminist legal groups mirrors a sentiment common to employees of any company.'   Several years ago, I attended a complaint of sexual assault where a woman called to report she had been sexually assaulted at a party.  When I got to her home, she was accompanied by a local Rape Relief representative.  As I spoke to the woman, I was continually interrupted by the Rape Relief rep, to the extent that I asked her to leave the room.  It turned out that the sex was consensual, and that the woman was actually intent on a guilt/revenge thing.  What actually happened is that following a fight with her boyfriend, she stormed off, went to the party, got drunk and had sex.  Upon returning home, she said "look what happened to me," and then reported it as a rape at the urging of her beau.   Unfounded!!!!! 
 I also told the Rape Relief worker to go ahead and complain.  She never did.

Sexual-explicit