The first time I wore a pair of heels — genuine, three-and-a-half-inch stilettos — was at age 13, for my middle school “graduation.” Though every step up to the podium felt as though I was teetering towards an imminent face plant, I couldn’t help but smugly think how mature I was compared to my flat-shoed classmates. In my mind, those strappy white sandals carried me away from middle school and a few steps closer to adulthood.

Though I would never have admitted it at the time, a 13-year-old eighth grader probably had no business wearing a pair of heels like that. So, you can imagine my distress when I flipped through a salacious gossip magazine (don’t judge; everyone has their vices) last week and spotted Suri Cruise, the daughter of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, trotting around in kitten heels.

Now, I know most little girls go through a stage where they raid Mom’s closet and play dress up. But let’s get a reality check here. Suri Cruise is three years old. With her sparkly high heels, frilly skirt and smudge of lipstick, the kid could have easily passed for six or seven. It’s fairly obvious that a toddler wouldn’t put together such an outfit on her own, so clearly the parents are encouraging this kind of dress.

I wondered if this was some kind of strange Scientology practice, but it turns out that Tom and Katie aren’t the only people over-sexualizing kids.

Take, for instance, the ad campaign from American Apparel’s children’s line. Dov Charney, the company’s sleazy CEO, was accused earlier this month of depicting young girls in sexually explicit ads — this led me to wonder if he too thought it was acceptable to dress little girls up in heels. Although there weren’t any toddlers strutting around in stilettos on his website, the kid models struck some pretty provocative poses: Girls modeled tights while standing spread-eagle, or lay prone with a leg flexed suggestively into the air. Another girl, hardly older than five or six, glared at the camera with pouty lips, dressed in a tight tank and what looked suspiciously like a push-up bra.

While Charney and other advertisers might be to blame for raunchy fashion ads, one has to wonder how the parents of these kids could allow them to pose in such a way. What happened to mothers who once squealed, “My little girl is growing up too fast”? But now, they’re quick to squeeze them in mini-dresses and short skirts. Clothing retailers and the fashion industry perpetuate the notion that it’s okay for grade-schoolers to look near 20 years old, a standard that parents have reluctantly accepted.

Unsurprisingly, we’ve become desensitized to the marketing that was once deemed risqué. Those familiar black-and-white Abercrombie and Fitch ads hardly seem racy anymore, and it wasn’t exactly shocking when Miley Cyrus posed in bed sheets for Vanity Fair.

Print campaigns and magazines aren’t the only outlets hiring out baby-faced models. During New York Fashion Week, 15-year-old Monika Jagaciak walked the runway at Calvin Klein, modeling clothing designed for women decades older than her. Last year, Australian model Maddison Gabriel headlined Gold Coast Fashion Week at age 13, leading industry critics to ask, “Just how young is too young?”

It’s no question that the media is saturated with sex, pushing young women to grow up too young and too fast. European nations currently ban runway models under the age of 16, but most other countries have yet to follow suit. Retailers feature pre-teens half naked, broadcasting the message that the younger (and sexier), the better.

Does the fashion industry have a social responsibility to crack down on pre-pubescent models, or do we simply accept that kid models are now the future of the industry? Time will only tell — just don’t be too shocked when you see a 10-year-old or younger teetering down the runway, stilettos and all.