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: 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.
Example Output: Non-sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: I don't think it bothers him in the least. The only thing worse than being a sore loser like you would be a sore winner. I'm sure Torque is quite happy to be in the position that he is. Clinton was a weak candidate, and the electoral college did exactly what it was created to do. If only you lefties hadn't sold out Bernie, he probably would have won. hahaha
Example Output: Non-sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: That link didn't say a single word about ERMUHGOD GAY ORAL SEX!!!! HOT, HOT MAN ON MAN ORAL SEX!!!111
Example Output:
Sexual-explicit