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 Input:
Comment: The meaning of the slang aside, young men are virgins and women pop their "cherries" frequently with happy outcomes for all concerned. "Daddy" does not exclusively denote an actual father but more frequently alludes to an archetypical, and let's be honest here, Oedipal desire. 
In my opinion, the name has more to do with eroticism than sexual assault which is not at all "sexy". Dragging the name "Trump" into the discussion is definitely something that kills an erection--especially the female variety. Clearly, many heterosexual men have boners for Trump. Lol, what turns some men on intelligent women will never understand.

Ex Output:
Sexual-explicit


Ex Input:
Comment: Oh yes, Arliss Sturgulewski.  Born Jane Wright, but I guess no one would remember that name as opposed to Arliss Sturgulewski.  Anyway, I digress.  Joe Vogler's halfway respectable showing in 1986 had much to do with Sturgulewski making it clear that she wanted nothing to do with anyone who supported any of her primary opponents.  Here in Fairbanks, the few supporters she had in 1990 were the same little coffee klatsch of liberal Republicans who would meet regularly to plot against the rest of the party.  Incidentally, one of that group wound up in Parnell's cabinet, but I likewise digress.  That same group later brought us the equally-as-disastrous choice of Jim Campbell.

Ex Output:
Non-sexual-explicit


Ex Input:
Comment: How come when an Indigenous rap group copies hip hop culture, it's called 'breaking cultural boundaries' but when a White person does the same it's called cultural appropriation?

Ex Output:

Non-sexual-explicit