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 Q]: Comment: Being a Jerk is lauded because its a backlash against strangers deciding they get to police what others say, do, and think. its a backlash against americanized westerners complaining about cultural appropriation when white people wear a kimono (cultural japanese aren't bothered by this) and similar behaviors. Its a backlash against being fired and or harassed by those who are so certain they're on the right side of history if you refuse to make use of random nontraditional pronouns (outside of he/she/they and derivatives). A backlash against people who think dragging someone through the social media wringer over a 50's pinup shirt is an appropriate response.

The professor deserves a reprimand and a healthy "what the fuck were you thinking" conversation with their peers. Termination isn't likely to do anything but cost money and instead of a thoughtless act, create an active antagonist to the behaviors the college hopes to instill.
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: Just because they fly them, or should I say 'have a committment to fly them', doesn't mean they are the best choice today. And besides, of all the countries you list, Australia, Canada, Britain and many others have all bailed. It is an expensive piece of junk that would get shot down in droves using the scenarios that they envisioned for it. Besides, we have no F-22's to provide air cover AND how would you ever install specialized hangers and DC generators in Canada's climate. That, and the exploding fuel tanks. As for the USN, they have flown (1), ONE F-35 off of a carrier. Big hairy deal. Are you even aware of the 'factoid' that both the Russian and Chinese radars can pick these slow moving beasts up 160 KM out from their missile sites (i.e S-400)? Expensive, full of flaws, impossible to maintain without selling the Province of British Columbia to raise cash, and obsolete before they even roll out.

Methinks you are an industry mule.
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: "This is absolute proof that SNAP will smear whomever they feel like at any time they feel like it."
It is not necessary for anyone to try to smear anyone in CI (Catholic Institution) clergies.
Start from Pope F. all CI clergies already proofed that they hide and condone clergy raping children all over the world and they still promote and stand by the clergy rapist.
People are giving up on CI clergies now. It used to have a few hundred posts on the Accountability articles.
To think CI clergies rape Christ immanent in children!!!
CI should have some shame on the state of criminal & d*vilish immoral corrupt sex abuse culture!
[EX A]:
Sexual-explicit