First of all I have read the answers to this question, but I'm not happy with them, I feel that they miss the point that I'm willing to address here.
I'm looking at a chi-squared test for independence of two dichotomous variables. Let's say the categories are $A, B$ for variable 1 and $a, b$ for variable 2.
I interpret the test as telling me how far the proportion of $a$ among $A$ is from the proportion of $a$ among $B$. It could be that $P(a|A)<P(a|B)$ and it could be the opposite, and if I look at the usual $\frac{(O-E)^2}{E}$ test, it's going to reject both directions: the most extreme $5\%$ of tables where $P(a|A)<P(a|B)$ as well as the most extreme $5\%$ of tables where $P(a|A)>P(a|B)$, which together make up the most extreme $5\%$ of all tables.
If you're willing to test only one of these directions, to me it makes perfect sense to use a $10\%$ level of significance and reject the null hypothesis only if the inequality goes the way you predicted. The argument that the $\chi^2$ distribution is asymmetrical (has only one tail that encompasses both extreme situations) looks artificial to me: if you really insist that this matters you could pretty much introduce a new statistic called $\pm\chi^2$ that is the same as $\chi^2$, except you add a minus sign when, say, $P(a|A)<P(a|B)$. Then the curve is symmetrical and does the expected job. What is wrong with this point of view?