In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: obscene and non-obscene. A comment is obscene if it is considered offensive to the public sense of decency, for example because it too obviously relates to sex or contains language regarded as taboo in polite usage.

Example Input: Comment: The authors of the  JJ report insist that homosexuality played no role in the abuse crisis, but their own data undermine this conclusion. For example, they plainly admit that “81% of the victims [between 1950 and 2002] were male,” and that 78% were post-pubescent.

So if the abusers weren’t pedophiles, and the victims were mostly adolescent males, wouldn’t that make the victimizers homosexuals?

What else could we possibly be talking about if not homosexuality?

Why can't you answer this question?
Example Output: Non-obscene

Example Input: Comment: F****** lawyers!
Example Output: Obscene

Example Input: Comment: "Lance said Antifa actions "need not be violent confrontation, but most Antifa, in practice, are willing to physically resist fascist marches and defend themselves against fascist attack.""

Is that what ANTIFA were doing at the inauguration when they torched cars and broke windows and threw bricks at cops?

Is that what ANTIFA were doing in Berkeley when they torched buildings and broke windows and threw bricks at cops?

ANTIFA stands with jihadis. They stand with BLM and BDS. ANTIFA are a terror group and need to be destroyed.
Example Output:
Non-obscene