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.

[EX Q]: Comment: Zuma fires competent ministers but retains incompetenet lying ministers such as Dlamini. She should be fired as a minister and taken out of Parliament, as she makes a mockery of the institution. One wonders why she is allowed to act as she does-unilaterally. The other question that should be asked is whether she has paid the court costs and show proof that the payment was out of her own pocket
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: RadirD, Kim Jung Un and the DPRK regime threaten us all the time.  Why would Trump or any other rational person use that as a line in the sand?  It took them a few hours after his asinine statement to threaten us yet again.  Foolish.

The only person who yells out "I'm going to punch you in the face!" is a coward who doesn't actually want a fistfight (like Kim Jong Un).  A serious person would just slam you in the kisser without warning.

Don't get me wrong, the DPRK is a growing and serious threat and there may not be a way out of a conflict at this point.  They have been seriously mishandled and underestimated by every president (both GOP and Dems) since the Korean war.
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: The other two criminals fled the scene.  Punahou has major problems.  Christian school?  Not a chance.
[EX A]:
Non-sexual-explicit