instruction:
In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.
question:
Comment: She was a "deeply flawed person" because of her actions and her choices - private email servers and more than 33,000 deleted emails; allowing American embassy personnel (including the ambassador himself!) to be viciously murdered in Benghazi, despite their repeated requests for more security; decades of controversy and investigations tied to her and her husband.

But more seriously, she was "deeply flawed" because of her political positions: pro-choice, pro-late term abortion, pro-gay "marriage", pro-Obamacare, pro-embryonic stem cell research, pro-tax, anti-religious liberty, anti-Catholic, anti-free market, anti-business...she would have continued the trend of pushing this nation and its citizens to the extreme political left, all the while demeaning and insulting those who disagreed with her ("deplorables") and never once trying to persuade, just use the power of government to coerce and impose.

Her flaws had nothing to do with her gender, and everything to do with her character.
answer:
Non-identity-attack


question:
Comment: Are you kidding me. Trans gender bathroom bill, westboro, god hates fags, attempting to pint gays as pedophiles, painting gays as the cause of the aids epidemic, and constantly judging everyone through a very negative lens has been the religious rights mode of attack.

Then you dare come on here and again attack people that call out intolerance. It is not intolerance to point out hate, and your side peddles in hate of everything they didn't like.

Your side has spent years shouting down and name calling anyone that doesn't agree, then you come here and blame the other side. Par for the course, I guess.

Party of Personal Responsibility or is it Party of Her Emails now?
answer:
Identity-attack


question:
Comment: Comments  20 or 30 years ago from three German girls in different brothels when asked why they were there: (1) when told prostitution was illegal in Canada: "That's outrageous. It's my body, and I do what I want with it." (2) "It's a nice way to relax after a week in the office, and make a little money into the bargain." (3) "The money's good and I get to have sex with a lot of nice men." I don't think they were coerced. But then the German authorities are (were?) pretty quick to shut down activities that did involve coercion.
answer:

Non-identity-attack