Some thoughts on this thread. Why can't both sides be right here? It doesn't seem improbable that we are more sensitive on the penis that we are able to process, thus if we lose all those nerves, well there's still plenty enough left. Think of all the people who have damage to the brain but remain unchanged. The body human remains functional through all sorts of trauma to the original design.
I didn't notice any feedback coming from restorers, so as one I'll put in my 2 cents. I'll challenge your 15 years cut with no loss of sensitivity with my over 45 years rubbing & desensitizing. It's a long & gradual loss IME. I noted in my 40's that it was taking more & more to excite Mr. Happy. Some years into restoring & (IME) I'm more sensitive. I still have to use mechanical assistance to stay consistently covered, but having done so for years now, being uncovered is about as pleasant as I'd guess rubbing your Glans with sandpaper would be. Heck, I can even detect someone's breath on my Glans now & I couldn't just a few years ago. I'm perfectly functional now & was so all these years, but I'm getting something back that slowly slipped away unnoticed over 4-5 decades.
I don't have issues that I was cut at birth, it was the logical choice at that time with the data available to my parents, but it is a choice you can't really undo. You can only ameliorate the symptoms. I do have a problem with some of the arguments for infant circumsicion;
-A religious covenant with God - certainly any deal with God should involve the child at an age when he can reason?
-To match the father - trust me at the pool I never matched my father, he was huge compared to my thimble. I always assumed that our difference would be equalized as a benefit of eating my vegetables & growing up.
-Penile health - teach you kid proper hygiene.
-Girls won't go down on a foreskin - I'm going to theorize if foreskins were the normal this would become the same issue cut guys have - some partners just won't go down on a guy & some partners won't go down on a girl.
-Phimosis. Really, proactive surgery for everyone against what might happen to some people? Really? Experience tells me skin CAN be stretched & enlarged, & they even have a less radical option where the Dr. makes a cut & lets it heal together, but more loosely.
If a reasoning male wishes to modify by circumcision - go for it. If you medically require it - go for it. But to just automatically do surgery against what might or might not happen, or as a matter of cosmetics makes no logical sense to me. Do we preventatively take the tonsils & appendix from new-born babies too?
Think how much more attractive a foot would be without the big toe. We don't really need that toe & shoes would fit better. Less crowded toes would mean less toe jam & fewer foot health issues. If most people didn't have a big toe, I bet most partners wouldn't suck the foot of someone who still had one of those big fat ugly big toes. I know - crazy, but I really see no difference between the two. Okay, I ramble, that was my 5 cents.