Indian medical scientists, Lakshaman & Parkash (1980) used the word “gliding” to describe the natural and normal movement of the outer foreskin of the penis as it moves seemingly without friction. They stated, “The outer layer of the prepuce in common with the skin of the shaft of the penis glides freely in "a to and fro fashion…”. The term stuck and is still used today.

Circumcision (amputation of the foreskin) tightens the residual skin so it largely prevents gliding action. Circumcised men generally lack gliding action and need lubrication to compensate for the lack of gliding action. Men circumcised at birth usually have no sense or understanding of the severity of their loss of pleasurable sensation.

Restoration of gliding action by foreskin restoration is a major advantage to circumcised men. The gliding action stimulates the nerves in the foreskin so it contributes to sexual pleasure. It aids penetration of the female partner and contributes to female pleasure by reduction of friction in the vagina. It also facilitates masturbation. 

There is substantial additional information available on the Internet at several locations. Just search for “gliding action”.

Yes, very important. This is actually one of the first improvements my husband and I noticed, after only a few months of restoration, a small amount of additional skin growth, and no significant dekaratinization yet. I wonder if others have noticed the same?

And, why do pro-circ people seem to so often favor a "tight" style that only makes this functional loss more severe? Is it purely an aesthetic thing? I've heard this even for those who go for elective circumcision as adults, so they will certainly experience a before-and-after.

The impact of this functional loss on a partner's comfort seems very underappreciated too.

Yes, very important. This is actually one of the first improvements my husband and I noticed, after only a few months of restoration, a small amount of additional skin growth, and no significant dekaratinization yet. I wonder if others have noticed the same?

And, why do pro-circ people seem to so often favor a "tight" style that only makes this functional loss more severe?  Is it purely an aesthetic thing? I've heard this even for those who go for elective circumcision as adults, so they will certainly experience a before-and-after.

The impact of this functional loss on a partner's comfort seems very underappreciated too.

Circumcision was introduced into American medical practice in the late nineteenth century (Victorian times). 

Then the belief was that masturbation would cause mental illness. E.J. Spratling (1895) recommended a tight circumcision to make masturbation difficult or impossible. That became the favored style, and it has not changed over the years. 

As a result, most circumcised males need lubrication for masturbation to overcome their handicap.

Dekeratinization is unlikely to occur until your husband has sufficient regrowth of foreskin to remain covered most of the time. When it does occur, the glans will become smoother and glossier and the color will tend to become more of a purple shade in Caucasians.

That terrible Victorian anti-sex ideology, and hysteria over masturbation in particular certainly had a big influence, I'm sure. And doctors claim a more-damaging "low" cut is faster to heal. But, I've also heard claims from circumcised men (possibly fetishists) that the tight cut somehow feels better. Is it purely a case of self-delusion, and/or sacrificing function for a desired aesthetic?

I'm actually the one restoring. My husband is intact, and one of my lesser motivations is wanting to be more like him. It's kind of nice having a "sneak preview" of what I might be able to better enjoy in a few years' time. Only wish I'd started years ago, when he first broached the subject. I would probably be finished by now.

That terrible Victorian anti-sex ideology, and hysteria over masturbation in particular certainly had a big influence, I'm sure.  And doctors claim a more-damaging "low" cut is faster to heal. But, I've also heard claims from circumcised men (possibly fetishists) that the tight cut somehow feels better.  Is it purely a case of self-delusion, and/or sacrificing function for a desired aesthetic?

I'm actually the one restoring. My husband is intact, and one of my lesser motivations is wanting to be more like him. It's kind of nice having a "sneak preview" of what I might be able to better enjoy in a few years' time.  Only wish I'd started years ago, when he first broached the subject.  I would probably be finished by now.

---

Non-surgical foreskin restoration is necessarily slow because it depends on skin cells splitting (mitosis). It can take ten years if one wants a full-length foreskin, but it lasts for the rest of one's life.