I think a lot depends on your evironment and what you were exposed to as a kid or teenager. (aka: when you first see a dick of the different model from yours). In my case I was very uncut and saw friend next door at age 4 or 5 and my dad then explained why his was different. (though my friend then denied ever having been sick on penis and needing an operation and saying his just-born baby broither already had his knob out).
And entering teenage, learned the "normal" foreskin should be shorter than mine, that it normally shortens during puberty, often leaving part or even all of head exposed in adult, and retracting fully during erection. (the books I read (mostly from France) matched what my uncut friends had. So I was influence by the fact that I had longer foreskin that others uncuts and that shorter foreskin were, at the time, described as the normal/desirable form.
I had seen another long foreskinned guy once though.
In hindsight, while Québec didn't have universal circ, those who didn't get done at birth who had long foreksins were often done before reaching puberty (my pediatrician recommended it to my parents with every checkup- but my dad was opposed and refused). And I knew a number of guys who had been done at about age 10-12). This is perhaps one reason I only saw one or two long foreskinned guys. (and why now, they are a dime a dozen). What big me is why the books from France described the foreskin as being shorter than it really was, perhaps an idyllic representation.
The other thing I learned was that the foreskin was supposed to shorten during puberty, leaving partial coverage in about 40% of males and stating retracted in about 10-15% of cases by the time one became adult. (remember reading this from q Québec sex book quoting some asian statistics). But for all, it was supposed to self retract fully during erection.
Upon reaching 18, I got hard one day, saw my foreksin remain over almost all of glans, and realised that with puberty about over, I was stuck with the long foreskin that didn't retract by itself. So took matters into my own hands to shorten it. I was still very much against circumcision, and continued to consider/announce mytself as uncut.
Fast forward a numbe rof years to the late 1990s/early 2000s, and the "uncut" generation statyed to appeat in locker rooms and long foreskins started to be more and mroe common. (in fact, by now, majy become adult still with phimosis).
Yet, the mental conditoning I got as child/teenager made me prefer the look of short foreksin and desire it enough to snip mine to get it.
When the Internet appeared, I was starved to see pictures of uncuts to compare my now short foreskin with uncuts, but alas, saw plenty of fully cut guys. And rarely saw flaccid guys where you can really see skin (and even for cut guys, always wondered if any had partial coverage like mine from seeing them erect).
Once I accepted I was no longer uncut, comparing against uncuts was no longer necessary, but was still curious to find other semi cuts (we were rare back then). But in doing so, was exposed to so many cut guys that you can't help but burn those images in the head.
Despite the majority now becoming uncut, despite the anticircers, the idea of getting a full cut germinated in me. Cosmetically, having bare head in underwear (sensation, and visual outline) as well as making the fila commitment to join the "cut tribe" pushed me to eventually get full circ (but was very tough decision because I liked being semi cut).
In my memories as teenager remain a lot of "disapoimted" imegery when I found out a friend was cut. The gact that those events stuck to my memories shows they had an impact and it was probably inevitable that seed would eventiually germinate.
Of course, today, if I had been born with same foreskin, none of this would have happened as long foreskin and now acceptable, and I would have seen many others with long skins like mine. And there is now poirn with uncut guys.
