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: Just because they fly them, or should I say 'have a committment to fly them', doesn't mean they are the best choice today.  And besides, of all the countries you list, Australia, Canada, Britain and many others have all bailed. It is an expensive piece of junk that would get shot down in droves using the scenarios that they envisioned for it. Besides, we have no F-22's to provide air cover AND how would you ever install specialized hangers and DC generators in Canada's climate. That, and the exploding fuel tanks. As for the USN, they have flown (1), ONE F-35 off of a carrier. Big hairy deal. Are you even aware of the 'factoid' that both the Russian and Chinese radars can pick these slow moving beasts up 160 KM out from their missile sites (i.e S-400)? Expensive, full of flaws, impossible to maintain without selling the Province of British Columbia to raise cash, and obsolete before they even roll out.

Methinks you are an industry mule.

A: Non-sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: Vow Donald Trump's face is as flaccid as his
penis.
It's probably the same color.

A: Sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: Amen to that...Greenberg wouldn't know a conservative if one came up to him, yanked down his britches and planted a Hillary button on his behind.

A:
Sexual-explicit
****