Craig

TL @211
“Craig, this is where I’m of the opinion that Paul is making a double reference. Gnostic beliefs had things mixed up about who was created first and who was deceived. So, it’s as if he were saying the woman Eve was not created first and she was the one deceived into sinning, not Adam. So, this woman is like Eve, a woman deceived into erroneous beliefs, but there is hope for her salvation if she and her husband continue in faith, love and holiness with self control.”

If we are trying to think about whether v14b could be about the Ephesian woman, rather than Eve, from the way you have expressed the view above, it would still suffer like the other views from the fact that part of it is about Eve’s deception, and Eve’s deception is not mentioned.
One way to turn these thoughts to a solution for the problem I see would be to paraphrase it
(For in contrast to what this Ephesian woman is teaching), Adam was actually the one who was formed first, and then Eve. And (in contrast to what this Ephesian woman is teaching)Adam was not deceived, but (rather than Adam whom she claims was deceived) this Ephesian woman is the one who is actually deceived and has come to be in the transgression.
Understanding it like this does not mention any deception of Eve in order to complete the thought, and contrasts the non-deception of Adam with the deception of the Ephesian woman as Paul does.
Its problem as I see it is that it depends on historical background material that may be impossible to be sure about.

TL @211
“There may be a lot more hidden in that word authentein than we realize because of the things done in the Artemis/Diana temple by the temple priestesses. If this woman or some women had been trying to forcefully mix in some of the agnostic teachings with their husbands or other men, it would have been ugly and confusing.”

This is the sort of thing I was wondering about a few days ago, and whether this may be the context of 11-15 and the whole of ch2.