In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Example Input: Comment: "No gentleman should ever do that, even if he is inebriated as well"
This is just one example of the kinds of comments one reads about such things 
So, what is wanted then is a double standard: 
SHE isn't responsible enough to give consent because she's drunk, but HE is still expected to be responsible .enough to be a gentleman EVEN when drunk.

THIS is the crux of the problem; Fuzzy logic, weighted automatically in the woman's favour, is what we get non-stop in article after article, and comment after comment - allowing her to claim no responsibility but insisting that the man must always be responsible no matter HOW drunk he is.

Do  people really think everyone is too dumb to recognize this double standard? Shame on those who use it, , and shame on those who go along with it!
Example Output: Non-identity-attack

Example Input: Comment: That's right. Only white men are allowed to be racist and sexist. 

Know your place, Robin H.
Example Output: Identity-attack

Example Input: Comment: Muslim martyrs? You mean like the 911 hijackers, who called themselves martyrs?
Example Output:
Identity-attack