Well, I'm not an expert in this area, but I think there is a political dimension in the use of human hair as well as animal fur or skin. Some woman, probably in the third world, has to sell part of her head! or at least you can say, a huge part of her beauty, that will take years to replace, so frivolous Westerners can show off. She's not shaving her head because she enjoys it but to survive economically, so some richer woman can look good. Most likely a middle-person gets more of the money it fetches than the woman selling her hair does. It's not totally unlike or unrelated to the horror of third-world people selling their body organs.
Women who can afford to wear hair extensions do it because they can pretend it's their own hair, but that is not possible in the case of a dress. That is really flaunting another person's body part (or whatever you want to call it). The style is obviously not commercial because it's too expensive. Thus it's frivolous both financially and ethically.
I loved the designs per se and I loved Chris, but I don't think hair dresses were a pleasant innovation. What's next - human skin outfits? I'm sure if we cut carefully we can remove a thin layer of skin from people who voluntarily choose to sell it to us, and it will grow back eventually, so what's the problem? (*sarcasm*)
The appetite of capitalism is infinite.
I really just came over here to mention that both Nina Garcia's blog and Tim's Take over at the Bravo site imply that, as expected, it was not the use of human hair, but the lack of "business sense" that ruined Chris' chances.
