Tag Implication: goatee -> facial_hair

Implicating goatee -> facial_hair

Reason: Goatee is a type of facial_hair.

It's also typically considered a beard right? Perhaps change it to implicate goatee → beard, and the facial hair bit will take care of itself.

I tend to think of beards as being fuller than a goatee.

Shinjidude said:
It's also typically considered a beard right?

Yes it is.
But mustache can also be considered as 'beard', no?

In fashion sense, implicating goatee -> facial hair seems okay to me.

dean_exia said:
But mustache can also be considered as 'beard', no?

Typically, that'd be a no... mustaches can be attached to a beard, but they're two different things.

dean_exia said:
But mustache can also be considered as 'beard', no?

In Japanese, yes (both translate to 髭, hige), but not in English so far as I know. Though in practice a full beard or a goatee will often include an integrated mustache, this isn't always the case.

If you're still with goatee → beard,
stubble and sideburns need to be implicated too.

dean_exia said:
If you're still with goatee → beard,
stubble and sideburns need to be implicated too.

Stubble is perhaps marginally a beard, though I'm not sure it'd warrant an implication. Sideburns definitely aren't in my opinion. There has to be some coverage of the chin or it's not a beard. Think of a handlebar mustache with integrated sideburns, that's a lot of facial hair, but still not typically considered a beard.

dean_exia said:
If you're still with goatee → beard,
stubble and sideburns need to be implicated too.

-1 on both stubble and sideburns.

Yeah, stubble and sideburns are not beards.

Hillside_Moose said:
-1 on both stubble and sideburns.

jjj14 said:
Yeah, stubble and sideburns are not beards.

Seen those coming.
So, I'm still with implication goatee -> facial hair.

Ｄｉｄ　goatee -> facial hair.