Facebook Co-Founder And Gay Activist Partner Engaged

Facebook's Chris Hughes and his partner Sean Eldridge have announced that they are engaged. The two made the announcement at a recent reception in support of Freedom To Marry, the organization in which Eldridge serves as political director.

The New York Post reports:

"This is very timely for Chris and I to have you here tonight to celebrate marriage and work on marriage," Eldridge announced to guests. "We got engaged two weeks ago, so there is a real sense of urgency." The two decided to make their longtime relationship legal on New Year's Eve. "We were in Thailand in a hotel room in the north. We were delayed after two days in the snowstorm and Chris got down on one knee and proposed. It was very traditional and very sweet," Eldridge told us. "We've been together for five years now."

Hughes and Eldridge will wait to marry until marriage equality is introduced to New York state. Congrats, guys!


  1. booka says

    Both of them are total catches! I hope their lives together is as rich as their material wealth.

  2. Tucker says

    Call me a snob, but I could never marry someone who doesn’t know whether ‘I’ or ‘me’ is used as the object of a preposition. I don’t care how cute or rich he is…

  3. Sean R says

    Congrats but there’s gonna be facebook jokes boys…(God they’re sooo young too)
    Can imagine Jon Stewart with:
    So this is where ‘friending’ on facebook ends up huh?
    At least there was more to a marriage proposal than each pushing the “like” button…
    We need “I do” button for facebook…
    OK, I’m done now!

  4. Charles says

    Chris Hughes is sooo cute. His boyfriend much less I think but hey, he’s the one getting married to him ūüėČ

  5. Reggie says

    Hey, Tucker! What about people who don’t know the difference between “you’re” and “your”? Or the ever popular… “there” and “their”? Good luck finding someone to marry.

  6. BCLance says

    There’s nothing pathetic about wanting the person you’re with to
    master simple grammatical rules, lol.

  7. Paul Weidig says

    @Tucker & BCLance,

    You two sour-ass queens will never find a partner with that supercilious attitude! As Winston Churchill once said, “Pedantry such as yours is something up with which I will not put!”

  8. Leroy laflamme says

    What’s pathetic is what motivates spoilsport sourpusses to post unnecessarily negative commnents. What’s the point of ruining good news with snarky comments about incorrect grammar usage or, worse, that bitchy remark about one of them being “less cute” than the other? Remember your manners, grinches – you’re in company, so if you feel the urge to fart, leave the room.

  9. Tucker says

    I regret my grammatical requirements necessitate that I circumscribe my matrimonial pursuits to graduates of the better “public schools’ in the U.K….lol!

  10. Sancho says

    Well, Mom always said that a person shouldn’t marry for money, but that only dating rich people can be a very smart way to end up happy. Clearly she was right.

  11. mark says

    This is great news for Chris. On a side note, note how the producers of The Social Network completely skipped over Chris’s sexuality. They had no qualms about covering the heterosexuality of the other founders of Facebook, however.

    It suggests that The Social Network is homophobic.

  12. Doris Dey says

    @mark What is suggests is that you’re presenting an idiotic argument.

    Maybe Chris contracted that his sexuality was not discussed in the film.


  13. tcw says

    With its embrace of conspicuous commitment, this gay generation has officially out-straighted the straights. Is that necessarily a good thing?

  14. says

    Congratulations to them! Just doesn’t get any better to be young, gorgeous, rich and GAY! Here’s hoping they have a slew of kids to make the marriage even better!

  15. Lexxvs says

    RULE OF TOWLEROAD NUMBER ONE: Every time there is an article showing some gay happiness, the bitter and failed readers must act upon making ridiculous and derisive comments to try to ease their own overwhelming sense of defeat.

  16. says

    Sigh, I was going to congratulate them as well for being cute & smart, AND comment on the grammar. Why can’t they be happy and grammatically correct at the same time? It’s not as if English has so many cases (really just 2, and the objective is only used as an object of a verb or pronoun). It’s not Ancient Greek, for God’s sake. Or Hungarian. Anyone who went to Brown AND Columbia should be able to use the objective case.

    And for the record, I DO have a partner, a writer who has never, as far as I can recall, misused this form in the 20 years I’ve known him. I’m not bitter. I am, however, a language professor, and we are allergic to such things.

  17. mld says

    @kevin, does your partner know he is one thier/there typo away from being kicked to the curb? language professor or not, you haven’t escaped being shallow.

    i hope my lack of shift key usage and my grammar irks you into crossing the street when you see ‘i’.

  18. Paul R says

    I’m a writer and editor of nearly 20 years, and am far more forgiving of mistakes people make when speaking (not writing), especially in front of a crowd. I think a lot of people posting negative comments are (understandably!) jealous of this couple. I wish them the best.

    Plus, he dropped of out Harvard, so how could we expect him to have proper language skills? (Kidding.) Though I’ve seen far more egregious misuses of this construction.

  19. Damen says

    I met Sean briefly when I was volunteering for the Obama campaign in Chicago. Nice attractive guy.

  20. Sancho says

    1. Is it possible to have anything resembling an egalitarian relationship with someone worth roughly $500 million, as Hughes’s net worth is reported?

    2. Is it even moral to be sitting on $500 million in a world where roughly 24,000 people die every day of starvation?

    I’d argue the answer to both is “No.”

  21. Paul R says

    @Sancho: unless he’s sold his holdings, his 5% share in Facebook is worth more like $25 billion. But I’ve no real idea. (I dated a billionaire—also from Internet earnings—and he was a cheap jerk; Hughes seems like a much better guy.)

    Perhaps you’d be more accepting if you reviewed what he’s done in his few years of limited massive wealth. For one, his latest venture is for nonprofits. For two, he’s working for marriage equality. For three, are you faulting him simply because he was successful? Because, you know, rich people and less-rich people can fall in love.

    In any case, when they started dating five years ago, Facebook was worth pennies on the millions relative to today. So maybe try to bite back on your bitterness.

  22. wimsy says

    My husband fractures the language every day and can’t spell worth a damn. We’ve been gloriously happy for 25 years.

  23. Daniel says

    This homosexual relationship will never be defined by anything more than sexual intercourse. Marriage cannot and will not define this relationship. Children cannot and will not define this relationship. Only sex defines this relationship. How unfortunate it is that our children, when learning of or seeing such relationships, cannot view the relationship independent of sexual intercourse. Because, were sex not involved, the relationship would be a friendship.

    Homosexuality is defined by sex. Period