You fall into the same trap I did. I also imagined that the palm turned inward indicated that the figure was not leaning it's weight against a support, but upon examining other Praxitalian works I find that this is a common pose in which the figure rests its weight against the forearm rather than using the hand as in this illustration of The Apollo Sauroctonus. The pose is common in Praxitalen works and cannot prove that here was no supporting structure. There may have been and there may not have been, but the inward turned palm will not prove that there was not. No discussion of published photographs can come to any conclusion. I repeat that the examination of anomalies on the surface of the hands and legs is necessary. Without this all is speculation without examination. As for the effeminacy of the figure, I find that in all works by Praxiteles and his imitators. There is a homoeroticism to his works which is disturbing like the works of Lehmbruck. I was privileged to be able to inspect a torso attributed to Praxiteles some years ago whose authenticity was in some doubt and I can attest to the fact the the sensuous and tactile surfaces seem to compel one to touch them. I did; it seemed to ask me to. The exaggerated grace and the meltingly smooth and sensuous surfaces are certainly antipathetic to our notions of masculinity. I would add that The Hellenic Ministry Of Culture describes the object on the boys headband as a leaf. Again without inspection I could offer no opinion. Is there a midrib? are there radiating veins? I couldn't say without looking at it. The speculation is interesting, but the answers require more than web photographs.