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: I am not assuming that she is lying or that she is telling the truth.  A photo shows a hand behind her it does not show it on her ass and it certainly doesn't show it on her bare ass... In fact it shows the opposite as the skirt would most definitely look different than it does if the back of it were being lifted AND he would have to be a freaking contortionist to touch a bare ass from that 'position' of his arm without lifting the skirt.  So I find Swifts claim of grabbing her 'bare ass' to be not only not credible but ludicrous.  And since 100% of the testimony wasn't that anyone else saw it but that Taylor Swift 'SAID' that it happened, well thats not enough evidence to do anything.  Now if she said that he grabbed her ass and not insisted that he grabbed her bare ass.. well then she has a more credible story at that point. IF that were the claim then I think she has at least a 50/50 chance of winning as it is she has 0.  Neither of these two deserve anything special.

A: Sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: The neofuedalist 0.1% don't give a rodent's derriere about the trauma and suffering of mere citizens.  The borders must vanish, the cultures must smush together, the world must become a society of rootless serfs.

A: Sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: Yes, leadership! There actually people in Juneau willing to a. lead b. make tough decisions and  most of all c. be honest about what needs to be done. Cowards like Pruitt will hide and lie and tell you cuts alone will do it, they won't the math is not there.

A:
Non-sexual-explicit
****