Yes, many circumcised American male adults today are fine with their circumcision, but that’s due to ignorance: many of them think the foreskin doesn’t have nerves and isn’t good for anything. They probably don’t even know that the glans is a mucous membrane that is supposed to be protected, not permanently exposed. That’s because our culture, and the circumcised men themselves, and the parents who chose circumcision for their son, NEED to believe that “foreskin is useless” to justify what has been done to them or their sons.
However, if more men learned the truth–that the foreskin is HIGHLY-INNERVATED–you would see a lot more men resenting the fact that their parents circumcised them. But people are becoming more and more knowledgeable about the foreskin, and more and more men every year, after learning that the foreskin is erogenous and highly-innervated, and that circumcision ablates the most sensitive parts of the penis, ARE expressing there resentment.
There is a growing chance that your son will be one of those men, given the fact that the sexual benefits of the foreskin are becoming more and more known and talked about every year (knowledge that previous generations of circumcised American men didn’t possess) and will likely be mainstream knowledge by the time your son has access to Google.
Far more men in their 30s resent their parents circumcising them than men in their 40s, and far more men in their 20s resent their parents circumcising them than men in their 30s, and far more teenage boys are starting to resent their parents circumcising them than men in their 20s. This is partially due to the influx of information regarding the foreskin described above, partially due to the growing recognition of bodily autonomy as a basic human right (my body, my choice), and partially due to feelings of discrimination based on gender (baby girls are federally protected from having their genitals cut at birth, despite having even more folds of skin and a higher infection risk throughout life; it is wrong that I am not protected as well).
This is all to say that if these streams of thought continue and grow in the public mind (and there is no reason to believe that they will not, as they are all very sensible positions), there is a darn good chance that your son will resent the fact that you excised highly-innervated tissue from penis at birth, that his bodily autonomy was violated, and that you would never dream of doing something like that to his more infection-prone sister but went ahead and did it to him.
Even aside from any true detrimental effect that circumcision has sexuality (which there certainly IS), the thought, “My parents had normal, healthy, highly-innervated tissue excised from my genitals at birth,” has HUGE potential to be VERY psychologically troubling. Again, more and more men every year resent their parents for circumcising them after learning that the foreskin is in fact highly-innervated and that circumcision ablates the most sensitive parts of the penis.
You may not care, but it is unreasonable to assume that he will not. Leave the choice to him.