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: I am not assuming that she is lying or that she is telling the truth.  A photo shows a hand behind her it does not show it on her ass and it certainly doesn't show it on her bare ass... In fact it shows the opposite as the skirt would most definitely look different than it does if the back of it were being lifted AND he would have to be a freaking contortionist to touch a bare ass from that 'position' of his arm without lifting the skirt.  So I find Swifts claim of grabbing her 'bare ass' to be not only not credible but ludicrous.  And since 100% of the testimony wasn't that anyone else saw it but that Taylor Swift 'SAID' that it happened, well thats not enough evidence to do anything.  Now if she said that he grabbed her ass and not insisted that he grabbed her bare ass.. well then she has a more credible story at that point. IF that were the claim then I think she has at least a 50/50 chance of winning as it is she has 0.  Neither of these two deserve anything special.
Example Output: Sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: No. You say he's made cakes for gay people before. You claim that as fact. How many has he made?

Nice buzzwords. Sounds to me like this man's faith "triggers" you. Why is it you "SJWs" never want your justice for the Christians?
Example Output: Non-sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: Rich people get good lawyers and avoid fair punishment. Poor people get screwed by the legal system. 
We have always screwed over the poor and always will.
Example Output:
Sexual-explicit