You're not gonna click the link to Ehrman's blog (who has time?) - and I confess I've not read every word of it - in fact, HE DID NOT WRITE this; it's a guest blog! oops!
How to Sugarcoast Scripture but Seem Sophisticated. Final Guest Post by Jill Hicks-Keeton
but this is the part that had me thinking you'd like it (or parts of it):

Here is a modern analogy that demonstrates the creative thinking embedded in Barr’s argument: The CDC recommended that Americans get vaccinated against Covid-19, but many Americans did not get vaccinated against Covid-19; therefore, the CDC actually meant “don’t get vaccinated.” What people do in response to guidance or rules does not change the intention of the guidance.

Barr needs to change Paul’s intention ... because her biblicism demands that she bring Paul’s intention in line with her desired application of the biblical text. She cannot understand the resistors to Roman patriarchal norms simultaneously as resistors of Paul or the codes ascribed to him, because Paul and his codes are in the Bible. Barr’s Bible benevolence project, then, makes the prescriptive words of a powerful man cohere with bits of evidence that some people, who did not write the Bible, did not follow that authority. Interpreters who see the biblical Household Codes as anti-patriarchal, as Barr does, mobilize non-compliant women to support their case, transforming Paul-resistors into evidence that Paul is good. And if Paul is good, the logic goes, the Bible can be too. (emphasis mine)