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 Input:
Comment: See if you can debate rationally rather than launching ad hominem attacks.

Ex Output:
Non-sexual-explicit


Ex Input:
Comment: Oh yes, Arliss Sturgulewski.  Born Jane Wright, but I guess no one would remember that name as opposed to Arliss Sturgulewski.  Anyway, I digress.  Joe Vogler's halfway respectable showing in 1986 had much to do with Sturgulewski making it clear that she wanted nothing to do with anyone who supported any of her primary opponents.  Here in Fairbanks, the few supporters she had in 1990 were the same little coffee klatsch of liberal Republicans who would meet regularly to plot against the rest of the party.  Incidentally, one of that group wound up in Parnell's cabinet, but I likewise digress.  That same group later brought us the equally-as-disastrous choice of Jim Campbell.

Ex Output:
Non-sexual-explicit


Ex Input:
Comment: “We are not going to be treated that way, and we will wear our pussies, as it were, on our head,” 
“One thing I like is taking back that word. He wants ‘pussies’? We’ll send a million of them to the National Mall for him,” 

As I recall it wasn't all that long ago the Register Guard was reporting that women on the U/O campus were [perhaps still are], referencing a kind of "Rape Culture"? 

Way to go ‘Pussyhat Project’  [or is it Code Pink?] either way doesn't matter you just threw respect for women from others [noting the "Rape Culture" protest]   under the bus.

Ex Output:

Sexual-explicit