instruction:
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.
question:
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,
answer:
Sexual-explicit


question:
Comment: You know nothing about vegans or vegetarians, then you go and lump them into the SAME category as "food fetishists"!  Like those young men in the Book of Daniel, yes?
answer:
Non-sexual-explicit


question:
Comment: Really? And hitlery is squeaky clean? lmao. That shitbag could headline with negative news for 10 years and you couldn't get all the filth off her sorry ass.
answer:

Sexual-explicit