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: 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

Answer: Non-sexual-explicit


Question: Comment: During the day I believe he went to prospective houses where he hoped to harm individuals, knocking on doors during the day where he asked for work.  He is an admitted liar.  He is manipulative producing his penciled writing.  It may be the cover story.  He is definitely a thug perhaps for political purposes.  He may not be who he presents himself at all.  He may just be an operative of some type perhaps a paid assassin.  How would you like him showing up at your door with your family there - while you are at work.  He may have.  Not buying his penciled story.  He is an admitted liar among other qualities.  He no doubt has his admirers and cohorts in various interests.  The one's he and his associates have not "mentioned".  Gullible reporting?  What's his military record?  I don't believe his story.  He is a bad character for sure.

Answer: Non-sexual-explicit


Question: Comment: Residential School survivors that were sexually abused for years didn't even get close to what this man is getting. This is so wrong!

Answer:
Sexual-explicit