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 Q]: Comment: Well, now, up until the last sentence I was willing to consider your point of view.  But you had to inject a racist comment, and that invalidated your entire post as far as I'm concerned. Yes, people who denigrate whites are just as racist as those who commit racial slurs against blacks or Latinos or other people of color.  It is apparent that you don't like whites in Langley ("that is a shame").  So, Mstraub, to you I say:  suck it up, cupcake and soldier on, we're here to stay.
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: Unless of course if it is an unborn baby. Then its just a mass of lifeless tissue.
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: PR was declared "bankrupt" due to $74B in Ponzi-scheme issued bonds and $50B+ in unfunded pension liabilities. With an annual GDP of $103B, and declining, PR was insolvent. PR tried to raise $9B to repair and replace it's failed electrical grid. Since PR was insolvent, they couldn't float bonds. 
The article stated, "Nearly two weeks after the storm, 93% of electricity customers remain without power, including some hospitals." This is the exact percentage lost after Maria. Yet any person who's worked with a municipal or state power grid understands there's always some redundancy stored and available. After a disaster, electrical power is restored to hospitals, shelters, critical buildings, etc. with those stored components. The fact PR Power & Electric has restored nothing? Not even a flicker of interim power? That's either gross incompetence by PR P&E or inaccurate reporting.
[EX A]:
Non-sexual-explicit