Here's an interesting study that found...

Masculinity in males predicted female orgasm before male orgasm/ejaculation with a .36 correlation. (Interestingly, female orgasm was negatively predicted by male self-rated dominance and masculinity, it was only female rated dominance and masculinity of their partner that correlated with early female orgasm.)
Physical attractiveness in males predicted female orgasm during or after male orgasm/ejaculation with a correlation of .50. (Baker and Bellis (1993) found greater sperm retention associated with women's orgasms occurring between 1 min before and 45 min after male ejaculation, a window roughly corresponding to the orgasm component that we identified.)
http://www.putslab.psu.edu/pdfs/Puts%20et%20al.%20EHB%202012-1.pdf

For the stats naive, .50 correlation explains 25% of variance, .36 correlation explains 13%, making looks twice as important as masculinity according to this study.

This study, if accurate, suggests the sperm of an attractive male is far more prized than the sperm of a masculine male. This would explain the rise/success of less masculine (which doesn't mean non-masculine) metrosexual men.

If attractiveness is more important than masculinity, i.e. if women desire to conceive babies more with attractive men than masculine men, why does red pill, a self professed sexual strategy sub, interested in figuring out and emulating what females find most attractive, obsess more about masculinity than attractiveness?

For example, according to research women prefer toned men to muscle heads, but red pill obsesses over weight lifting, being as strong as possible (gains, gains, gains), not being as toned as possible (which is what women find most attractive). http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Lift-More-Weights-Get-More-Mates-8069?RelNum=8069

Is red pill misinformed about what females find attractive or is red pill, in practice/reality (whether they are aware of it or not), more of a pro-masculinity emotional support sub than a sexual strategy sub that values scientific evidence and truth?

Red pill men do you prioritize attractiveness or masculinity more? Do you think strength is more important than endurance? If you currently prioritize masculinity, are you willing to prioritize attractiveness over masculinity (i.e. being more metrosexual than manly) if it means being more attractive/successful with women?

Obviously this study says being masculine is attractive to women too, but clearly certain fitness regimes are going to make one more masculine/dominant/muscle-centric and some are going to make you more toned/metrosexual/cardio-centric. If women prefer the latter, why is red pill obsessed with the former?

My only hypothesis on this is that disdain of women has caused some men to want to think the opposite is best, hypermasculinity, whereas in reality attractive men that are semi-masculine (vs hypermasculine) are more appealing to women sexually (as suggested by the orgasm patterns/timing in this study and women preferring toned men to muscle heads). But, I'm sure there are other explanations.