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.

Comment: The alleged sexual assault of one of the three occupants was deleted from an earlier online version of this story published this morning.  The sexual assault aspect to this case has been appearing and disappearing off and on from various sources in the last week.  Why it's frequently deleted is anyone's guess.  Either a victim made the allegation or not.  It's really that simple.
Sexual-explicit

Comment: And now for the latest in unvetted and fake news we turn to the G&M.
Non-sexual-explicit

Comment: I think Yakabuski's actual point is defined by the following statement: "Mr. Obama was not born, experientially speaking, an African-American. He became one." Obama was raised by a white mother in a predominantly non-black (although still quite diverse) community. Does this mean he couldn't understand or represent the black experience, as some American blacks argued to be the case? Skin colour or apparent race isn't the sole determinant of identity. Perhaps all  multigenerational North Americans should take one of those DNA ancestry tests that are advertised on television.. Many of us are probably much more diverse than we might imagine. Genealogical research into my family's background has uncovered some surprising facts, including that we had a  great grandmother who was of Portuguese descent. Does diversity diminish and discredit identity, or enhance it? I think those who argue that purity is equivalent to legitimacy will in the long run be on the losing side of this argument.

Non-sexual-explicit