The nudie statue in Overland Park’s arboretum has spoken.

“I survived narrow minds,” was the wording on a sign that appeared around her bodice.

Not so fast, Ms. Semi-Nude.

Maybe the tall bronze is unaware that her detractors have launched a petition drive. They plan to force a grand jury to decide if the statue violates a state law against promoting obscenity to children.

She’s also had her exposed breasts covered recently by two T-shirts (removed, as was the sign).

I say we name her. “Prudence” might work. Feel free to make a suggestion.

But brace yourself.

The hoopla will surely brand the metro area as a backwater, wouldn’t-know-art-unless-it’s-painted-on-the–side-of-a-barn kind of place. National media will swoop in with ridicule. And as flyover journalism goes, don’t expect a fair view of our area’s wonderful amenities.

They won’t mention the world-class Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, or the Nerman and Kemper contemporary galleries. All show that many people here appreciate art that challenges, and are comfortable analyzing an artist’s intent.

One point that keeps being missed is what’s being photographed. She’s being accused of promoting sexting because she’s holding a camera.

But the camera is pointed at her head area, not her breasts. And she’s headless. The piece is intended to speak about not valuing your whole self.

That said, it is understandable why the statue would be too much for some people. She’s rather well-endowed.

Still, objectors might want to study the obscenity laws they wish to invoke.

This lady just might have to be, shall we say, more engaged, to be prurient.

Statutes include “offensive representations or descriptions of ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, including sexual intercourse or sodomy; masturbation....” She needs to be doing more than standing on her pedestal.

Also,“taken as a whole, a reasonable person would find that the material or performance lacks serious literary, educational, artistic, political or scientific value.” Obviously, some disagreement there.

This point seems to be missed by the statue’s objectors: NO tax dollars were used. The statue was donated, along with the other pieces on the pathway.

Besides, people can enjoy the arboretum and avoid the statue.

There are miles of trails to ramble without viewing anything offensive. Although I guess at the right time of day, during the right season, it might be possible to happen upon some wildlife doing what animals sometimes do.

Oh, the horror.