Quite often the debate of circumcision becomes an ugly western cantina fight. Everybody against everybody. Strong emotions here and there. People getting defensive one way or another. A quite recurring non-argument is this: "it's just a dick, who cares, get over it".
For some reason, the penis is perceived as a malignant organ, perhaps because it's the active, the penetrative organ of sex. Female bodies are thought to be delicate, pretty, pure. Men should be tough. Men can be punished. Men are dicks and dicks are ugly. Men should not cry.
But the foreskin was not taken away from the man; it was taken away from the baby or the infant. Even if you talk about it to an old man, it's not the old man who lost it, it's the baby in him, it's the infant in him.
Most men are very fond of their penises. Some have names for it. Most men would think they have pretty penises. Almost everybody talks to his own penis at some time. Childish, yes of course, but it's just human. Just like women who are fond of their boobs.
So... who cares? Well, each man cares about his own penis. It's his, nobody else's. And when a man grieves over his foreskin, he has every right to do it. He doesn't have to "get over it".
When somebody loses a body part, they usually look for a way to reconstruct that part (even if only for cosmetic reasons), or at least to wear a prosthesis: breast reconstruction after mastectomy, glass eyes or patches over missing eyes, dental bridges over missing teeth, prosthetic hands, arms, legs...
So why would we judge a man who looks at his naked body in the mirror and can't stop fixating on a missing area of skin on his favorite part of the body, his private and personal friend?