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: Here we go again.  

The problem with Milo is exactly the same as the problem with Thomas Sowell, which is likely to become the problem with Camille Paglia:  In the authoritarian world of identity politics, your politics are owned by your group identity.

Milo is Libertarian and openly homosexual (as is Camille Paglia).  His real sin is his honesty.  Make no mistake, statutory rape is rape regardless of consent by the victim, because the victim simply is not old enough to consent.  Milo had his first (homo)sexual encounter when he was 13 or 14 with a Catholic priest .  Thirteen or fourteen is too young to have sex -- homosexual or otherwise -- but they're doing it anyway.  Milo's politically unforgivable transgression was to explain that he was a willing participant and to describe the personal importance of the experience.

His account made me uncomfortable because it forced me to confront realities outside of my personal experience.  That's one of the things good journalism does,

A: Sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: Thor  
You understand that the man is a psychopath, you must then realize he is not mentally capable of reason, or obeying the law. Iraq and city slums have created a lot of ticking time bombs, mass shootings have become too frequent.

A: Non-sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: The article clearly states it's a service dog. Were you unable to read that part?

And now you're speculating on what her condition is, and judging it, when you know nothing about it. How disgusting.

A:
Non-sexual-explicit
****