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.

Q: Comment: That's right. Where are all those people who screamed about Hillary's emails now? What? All I hear is silence, the silence of lambs led to their slaughter. Their hero turns out to be just what we knew all along, a pussy-grabbing casting couch celebrity with absolutely zero concern for the average American. You asked for it, you got it (in the backside), Toyota.

A: Sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: Did I miss something in the article about her parents immigration status? Or is this an assumption based on the colour of her skin? 

Perhaps her parents did immigrate to Canada, perhaps it was her grandparents, or maybe she came on her own. Does it matter?

People who made, and also those who went along with this assumption, simply based on what she looks like need to get with the times and STOP making assumptions on people based on the colour of their skin.

A: Non-sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: This move by the Mexican president will surely anger liberals.   In the context of Harper closing down the Iranian embassy, liberal supports cheered Justin re-engaging talks with Iran on the notion that talk and negotiations is the best way to solve diplomatic impasses.  Even with despotic regimes.

I'm sure the previous 300 comments attacking Trump for Pena Nieto's cancellation, are really just misplaced anti-democratic anger directed at Nieto.

Because as we all know, liberals are NOT massive duplicitous hypocrites.

Right?

A:
Non-sexual-explicit
****