I sure had a feeling it was coming from someone's arse
Victoria was 'Victorian' mostly because she felt the need to be different and better and more respectable than the RF in epoch of her uncles. So, to extrapolate 'Victorian' values to the era of her uncles and grandfather, is simply stupid.
That said, George III was more stuffy than his sons.
He had a thing against his royal family *marrying* beneath themselves. [his view, apparently, was that lowly girlies should be kept as mistresses]
Victoria certainly had no such scruple: she allowed her some kids to marry something utterly lowly in terms of royalty... read: Battenbergs, later known as Mountbatten. That's a root why that lowly family managed to climb itself to some prominence in Britain, so dumber people today think that the lowly Mountbattens would be royal... However, cognoscenti know that they come from an adultery of a german princess of Baden (Baden is nothing spectacular - just a slice of bass-ackwards territory near Rhine) with her french-emigre-born chamberlain, their adulterous son marrying a daughter of a german-polish military officer, and there their descendants it goes to Victoria's family...
All that said, sons of George III became mostly known for frivolity because of their heterosex.
There's singular lack of even one nice homosexual reputation among them. So, I guess it was quite right that they were despised and hated. (Isn't that a right thing to face those who practice heterosex....)
Of course, there was at the time a second cousin of George III, that man being an obvious homosexual (and that guy had thing with organizing theatre and with magnificence and with costumes). Just to think how he collected good-looking courtiers around himself, and is rumored to have managed (after a lot of delay and prevarication) to sire a son by the machanism of himself pucking his wedded wife, while one of his butchy lover men was probably puckling him (or at least helping with some stimulation)