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.

Example Input: Comment: Yes, whatever precedent or wording or function that can be found, to remove Meredith from the Senate - a man few Canadians consider worthy of dignity or respect. Men like him, with financial power and connections, who groom teen aged girls for sex, are a dime a dozen in Canada. The Senate risks wide perception of total uselessness if Meredith remains.
Example Output: Non-sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: And don't forget, nearly EVERY hand you have ever shook has touched a penis! GASP!
Worried about bacteria? Wash your hands, wash your bags; it's not that hard, dude.
Example Output: Sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: If the Democrats had any brains they would never "block" a Supreme Court nominee just based on ideology.  If they are not qualified that is one thing but if they are not a left winger that is nonsense.  Maybe the Republicans should then block any leftie from the court who is otherwise qualified.  This kind of stuff is what ruins our entire system and makes people not trust it at all.  We want good judges who are not buried in ideology but can rule on the facts and the law.  How hard is that?  Often, it is much easier than checking a potential ruling against a certain ideology.  Try it!
Example Output:
Non-sexual-explicit